Re: [v6ops] Fwd: 464XLAT Trial Deployment Report

Hi
I think 464 XLAT can work for the cases where scalability and user tracking
ability are not so critical, since it uses stateful XLAT in Core and
stateless XLAT in CPE, not stateless double translation for both Core and
CPE.

I support it adopted by WG as an experimental document.
Congxiao
2012/2/6 Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>

>  On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 05:40, Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com> wrote:
>
>> I need to know what the working group, and especially the operators in
>> it, wants to do with this. Do you want to adopt it as a working group
>> draft? Do you want to discuss it but leave it individual? Do you think it
>> belongs in another working group, and if so which? Do you have another
>> opinion?
>>
>
> Speaking as an Android developer, I think this is useful. Many GSM / UMTS
> networks do not and will not support the IPV4V6 PDP type required for
> dual-stack access, and running IPv4 and IPv6 on separate PDP contexts is
> brittle and has scaling issues.
>
> It would be nice if there was a WG draft aiming to take this to standards
> track in addition to an implementation. As to which WG it belongs in, I
> don't know.
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
>