IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-64share

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 30 July 2013 14:55 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAC7C21E80DE for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 07:55:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.476
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.476 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.123, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 zAW50LdrOEqh for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 07:55:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3::184]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3611821E80CB for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 07:55:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (desk.marajade.sandelman.ca [209.87.252.247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EC8820184; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:01:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 9A61B63A7C; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 10:53:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C845636AD; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 10:53:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "cb.list6" <cb.list6@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD6AjGSG7B=7sGtj0Xjxyh2g5MnMxiopuEUeqJ6LgD=G=zS=-g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <12351.1375184644@sandelman.ca> <CAD6AjGSG7B=7sGtj0Xjxyh2g5MnMxiopuEUeqJ6LgD=G=zS=-g@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3-dev; GNU Emacs 23.4.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 10:53:47 -0400
Message-ID: <8966.1375196027@sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org, Cameron.Byrne@t-mobile.com
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-64share
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 14:55:20 -0000

cb.list6 <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote:
    > On Jul 30, 2013 4:46 AM, "Michael Richardson" <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >> Cameron, which scenario does the Android AOSP use?

    > Aosp has not integrated this yet, but this implementation was submitted

    > http://dan.drown.org/android/clat/

    > Scenario 2 is  used. There is value in the device being able maintain
    > communication (sockets) while tethering is turned on and off. Voip is a good
    > example of something that should not bounce when tethering is turned on

I don't understand.
Why does adding a second IP address change anything that is already alive?

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email