IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Softwires] 4via6 use case where compatibility with single translation would be useful?

Rémi Després <despres.remi@laposte.net> Thu, 02 February 2012 09:32 UTC

Return-Path: <despres.remi@laposte.net>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3070721F85D8 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 01:32:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BKD-wz9b0lyA for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 01:32:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (smtp1-g21.free.fr [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A4D621F85D6 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 01:32:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a01:e35:8a6d:d900:129a:ddff:fe6b:c6fb] (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e35:8a6d:d900:129a:ddff:fe6b:c6fb]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1179594023D; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 10:32:14 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-98--171900794"
From: Rémi Després <despres.remi@laposte.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAFUBMqX83kPN7VeE4=iu30ne2p7zuBuKk6Aq2SHkkEqz3Tye5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 10:32:13 +0100
Message-Id: <96370448-0F56-4C0A-9AEB-86BFEED319D0@laposte.net>
References: <C992D2F8-5E8C-4601-B07D-37AB2B7E72D3@laposte.net> <CAFUBMqXm3BiK5Cq8nmy97Nr6eVYZgooc38Rv3PB6nOWAzmMbUg@mail.gmail.com> <52DBFDA9-1BBB-47DD-9165-F9C0341A669C@laposte.net> <CAFUBMqXVx9F5V+_5RcLdr8V5dn9Hxixm+19hXX10Zh-86t-W4w@mail.gmail.com> <3069401B-458B-41E2-B6B3-B9FA8811CC30@laposte.net> <CAFUBMqX83kPN7VeE4=iu30ne2p7zuBuKk6Aq2SHkkEqz3Tye5Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maoke <fibrib@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: Softwires WG <softwires@ietf.org>
Subject: [Softwires] 4via6 use case where compatibility with single translation would be useful?
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/softwires>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 09:32:24 -0000

Le 2012-02-01 à 03:04, Maoke a écrit :

> 2012/1/30 Rémi Després <despres.remi@laposte.net>
...
> Could you, for the sake of a less abstract discussion, describe at least one configuration you have in mind,
...
> to my best understanding, one of the merits of the translation approach is: when an end system changes its stack from ipv4 to ipv6, as long as the ipv4-translatable ipv6 address is applied, its peers in the past can keep using the same ipv4 address (as the temporal-unique identifier) to have access to it.
...
> i think this is a clear-enough use-case but if i still make any confusion, i may draw some pictures for you offline. 

This discussion IMHO deserves to remain online.
Could you, for this use case:
- indicate applicable mapping rules 
- clarify whether there is a NAT64 or not
(pictures don't seem necessary at this stage) 

We should be able to analyze what is won and what is lost compared to other solutions.

Regards,
RD

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email