Dear all,
I have just read the new DS-Lite version and I have the following comments for
Section 8:
(1)
8.2. NAT conformance
A dual-stack lite AFTR SHOULD implement behavior conforming to the
best current practice, currently documented in [RFC4787] and
[RFC5382]. Other discusions
Hello, Alain, Yong,
As yo noted, authors of the 4rd draft included the word Intarea in the file
name of this 4rd draft.
This was intended only as a hint that the draft might be presented there if not
presented in Softwires (a previous version had been listed out of scope in
Softwire).
Yet, all
Jim,
to kick-start the discussion, could you outline the usage scenarios that
would drive the requirements you mention below?
Thanks, Frank
-Original Message-
From: softwires-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:softwires-boun...@ietf.org]
On
Behalf Of Jim Guichard
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Comments like this one should really have been sent during the wg last call,
long ago...
That said, I tend to agree with Francis that MUST is too strong.
As about ALG, I do not see what is wrong there.
- Alain.
On Mar 17, 2011, at 4:55 AM, mohamed.boucad...@orange-ftgroup.com
-邮件原件-
发件人: Templin, Fred L [mailto:fred.l.temp...@boeing.com]
发送时间: 2011年3月18日 1:14
收件人: Xu Xiaohu; softwires@ietf.org
抄送: dh...@ietf.org
主题: RE: [Softwires] fwd: New Version
Notificationfordraft-guo-softwire-6rd-ipv6-config-02
Hi Xiaohu,
I'm just seeing this draft for the
