Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E & 4rd-U
Alain Durand <adurand@juniper.net> Thu, 02 February 2012 17:37 UTC
Return-Path: <adurand@juniper.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 867D121F8525 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 09:37:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.139
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.139 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.160, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 P+xNTICnBoja for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 09:37:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod7og106.obsmtp.com (exprod7og106.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A5EF21F851C for <softwires@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 09:37:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob106.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTyrJ1Dj7szHRj7m9jJWHyb8xqtngMGZ1@postini.com; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 09:37:29 PST
Received: from EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net ([fe80::c821:7c81:f21f:8bc7]) by P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net ([fe80::88f9:77fd:dfc:4d51%11]) with mapi; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 09:35:09 -0800
From: Alain Durand <adurand@juniper.net>
To: Rémi Després <despres.remi@laposte.net>
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 09:35:08 -0800
Thread-Topic: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E & 4rd-U
Thread-Index: Aczh0QJbyQrxU/MASwyi3FjHeOpG8A==
Message-ID: <8A238676-62B7-4A8B-8986-B24A964CFD9B@juniper.net>
References: <B140D6B2-1B19-43D7-9B63-6BEA83CEB164@juniper.net> <3AAD65F3-5169-49B7-9698-E820EF419B35@employees.org> <171F46DF-2C26-48A8-BE2D-D859C9DE43E9@laposte.net>
In-Reply-To: <171F46DF-2C26-48A8-BE2D-D859C9DE43E9@laposte.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
x-exclaimer-md-config: e4081efb-6d29-443c-8708-750833aec629
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: softwires WG <softwires@ietf.org>, Yong Cui <cuiyong@tsinghua.edu.cn>, Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E & 4rd-U
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 17:37:30 -0000
Please, Remi, do build such a table! That would be very useful. Alain. Sent from my iPad On Feb 2, 2012, at 10:56 AM, "Rémi Després" <despres.remi@laposte.net> wrote: > Hi Ole, > > This kind of table you have below is IMHO the tool we need at this stage :-). > > It has however to be more detailed: so far, it covers 4rd-H (the header-mapping variant of the last 4rd-U), but not 4rd-E (its encapsulation variant). > A 4 columns table would be ideal. Also, It could have a sign identifying points that are N in current drafts, but could easily become Y if the final consensus is that they are worth the additional complexity. > I can work on it if you are interested. > > More specific points below. > They can be discussed one by one. > > > Le 2012-02-02 à 11:12, Ole Trøan a écrit : > >>> More over, 4rd-U claims to solves a number of issues that the MAP suite of documents does not address. It would be beneficial to have >>> a discussion on the mailing list to see if a) those issues are important or not and b), if they are, are they properties of 4rd-U or could they be solved as well >>> in MAP, they just have not been addressed there yet. >> >> here is a comparison table of the feature differences between MAP and 4rd-U. >> (try a fixed width font if it doesn't survive your particular MUA mail mangling algorithm.) >> >> Appendix A. Comparions of stateless A+P solutions >> >> +-------------------------------+----------------+------------------+ >> | Feature | MAP | 4rd-U | >> +-------------------------------+----------------+------------------+ >> | Encapsulation | Y | Y | >> | Translation | Y | Y | >> | Hub and Spoke mode | Y | Y | >> | Nested CPE | N | Y | >> | End-user prefixes > 64 | Y | N | > > (1)It is AFAIK also a "Y" for 4rd. > (Not sure to understand the point.) > >> | E-mode: Support for IPv4 | Y | N | >> | options | | | > > (2) 4rd-U draft 03 has excluded IPv4 options for both 4rd-H and 4rd-E but, for 4rd-E, they can easily be put back if found useful. (My vote is NO, but a WG consensus on YES for 4rd-E would not be a problem at all). > > >> | T-mode: MF bit and TOS bits | N | Y | >> | transparency | | | >> | T-mode: Checksum | L4 rewrite | CNP | > > (3) The functional point is guaranteeing IPv4-payload preservation, with compatibility with ALL protocols using TCP-like checksum, present of future, with checksums anywhere in the payload. > >> | H & S set bit 79 needed | N | Y | > > (4) The functional point is to permit use cases like that of 5.3 of the last 4rd-U draft. > The added complexity for this is close to nil, and applies ONLY to H&S scenarios. > > If abandoned (which is easy), it should be with due WG consciousness of which use cases are thus abandoned. > > >> | Interface-id | RFC6052 | V octet | >> | MAP traffic identified by | Address/prefix | Interception of | >> | | | V octet | > > (5) The main functional point of the V octet is to avoid interfering with subnet assignments in customer sites. > (6) Not sure to understand what you mean by "Interception of V octet". IPv6 routing within CEs or BRs is sufficient to orient IPv6 packets to the 4rd function. > >> | Port mapping algorithm | GMA. Prog. | GMA. Fixed | > > (7) Substantial complexity added for GMA isn't justified, in my understanding, by real use cases that would need it. > This could easily be added to 4rd-U if so decides the WG (a waste IMHO). > >> | Fragment forwarding on BR | N | Y | >> | without reassembly | | | >> | Shared fragmentation id space | N | Y | >> | BR rewrite fragmentation | N | Y | > > >> | MSS update | Y | N | > > (8) I found no reference to MSS in MAP-E, and no reference to MSS update in MAP-T. > Did I miss them? > >> | Complete IPv6 address / | Y | N | >> | prefix | | | > > (9) Not sure what you mean by a complete IPv6 prefix. I see no functional limitation of 4rd-U with prefix lengths. > >> | Provisioned with DHCP | Y | Y | >> +-------------------------------+----------------+------------------+ >> >> Table 1: A+P comparison > > > Cheers, > RD > > >> >> let us make it clear that these two solutions are solving exactly the same problem, and they solve it in the same fundamental way (A+P). the differences we're talking about here are what whistles, bells (and dongs) we want to add on to the base specification. consider it a buffet, any feature from one of them can be applied to the other. >> >> cheers, >> Ole >> _______________________________________________ >> Softwires mailing list >> Softwires@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > Softwires@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
- [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E & 4r… Alain Durand
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Mouli Chandramouli (moulchan)
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Ole Trøan
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Alain Durand
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Ole Trøan
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Ole Trøan
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Ole Trøan
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Tina TSOU
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Ole Trøan
- Re: [Softwires] Moving forward with 4rd-T, 4rd-E … Ole Trøan
- [Softwires] MAP & 4rd-U - Preserving freedom of s… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] MAP & 4rd-U - Preserving freedom … Ole Trøan
- [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protocol i… Rémi Després
- [Softwires] MAP & 4rd-U - Robust Renumbering avoi… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] MAP & 4rd-U - Robust Renumbering … Ole Trøan
- [Softwires] MAP and 4rd-U - how to try to converge Rémi Després
- [Softwires] MAP and 4rd-U Alain Durand
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd-U Ralph Droms
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd-U Ole Trøan
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd-U Reinaldo Penno
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd-U Jacni Qin
- [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Feature comparison table Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Feature comparison … Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Feature comparison … Ole Trøan
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Feature comparison … Xing Li
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Feature comparison … Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Feature comparison … Ole Trøan
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Feature comparison … Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Maoke
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Maoke
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Maoke
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Washam Fan
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Maoke
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Maoke
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Maoke
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] Checksum neutrality and L4-protoc… Maoke
- [Softwires] 答复: MAP and 4rd-U Huangjing
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Xing Li
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Xing Li
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Rajiv Asati (rajiva)
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Xing Li
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Wojciech Dec
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Wojciech Dec
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Rémi Després
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Wojciech Dec
- Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with S… Rémi Després