On Sep 12, 2011 8:51 PM, "Satoru Matsushima" <[email protected]> wrote: > > The introduction in the draft says: > > > > IETF recommends using dual-stack or tunneling based solutions for > > IPv6 transition and specifically recommends against deployments > > utilizing double protocol translation. Use of BIH together with a > > NAT64 is NOT RECOMMENDED [RFC6180]. > > > > > This statement makes a strong obstacle when we develop stateless solution with translation in softwires wg. > I think that it is still remained a room to make decision whether removing the statement or remaining it. > The discussion which we'll have in the softwires interim meeting would be helpful to decide it. >
+1 Nat464 has been shown to overcome real world issues, it solves a real problem. Additionally the bih mapper should not have to require DNS so that ipv4 literals can be overcome Cb > Best regards, > --satoru > > > > On 2011/08/31, at 22:53, The IESG wrote: > > > > > The IESG has received a request from the Behavior Engineering for > > Hindrance Avoidance WG (behave) to consider the following document: > > - 'Dual Stack Hosts Using "Bump-in-the-Host" (BIH)' > > <draft-ietf-behave-v4v6-bih-06.txt> as a Proposed Standard > > > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > > [email protected] mailing lists by 2011-09-14. Exceptionally, comments may be > > sent to [email protected] instead. In either case, please retain the > > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > > > Abstract > > > > > > Bump-In-the-Host (BIH) is a host-based IPv4 to IPv6 protocol > > translation mechanism that allows a class of IPv4-only applications > > that work through NATs to communicate with IPv6-only peers. The host > > on which applications are running may be connected to IPv6-only or > > dual-stack access networks. BIH hides IPv6 and makes the IPv4-only > > applications think they are talking with IPv4 peers by local > > synthesis of IPv4 addresses. This draft obsoletes RFC 2767 and RFC > > 3338. > > > > > > > > > > The file can be obtained via > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-behave-v4v6-bih/ > > > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-behave-v4v6-bih/ > > > > > > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Behave mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
