everyone--
My question about the architectural model of Dave Thaler's SAF being
related to Realm-specific IP was not an idle one. It's a rare enough
occasion that I'm the one who remembers something relevant that
someone like Dave doesn't already know about, that I'm genuinely
surprised when it happens. Hence, my hair pulling. Sorry about
that. (I was also over-caffeinated. Sorry about that, too. I was
awake until 0300 last night fixing bugs.)
Realm-specific IP is described in RFC 3102 and RFC 3103. The protocol
was even defined to support both IPv6 and IPv4 address realms on
either [or both] sides of an RSIP gateway.
Framework: <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3102>
Protocol Specification: <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3103>
It strikes me that if SAF isn't equivalent to RSIP, then I'm not
seeing the relevant distinctions. Also, if SAF *is* functionally
equivalent to RSIP, then what makes SAF now more architecturally
appropriate than RSIP was then? If SAF isn't equivalent to RSIP, then
what's the difference I'm missing?
--
james woodyatt <[email protected]>
member of technical staff, communications engineering
_______________________________________________
nat66 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
