Re: [Softwires] map-00: review on the mode 1:1

Qiong, On 21 July 2012 11:46, Qiong bingxu...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Woj, This is not only about determining which parameter to explicitly exist in MAP rule, but also the configuration in BR. If you include PSID explicitly, then 1) you need to configure per-subscriber rule in BR since the

[Softwires] Test+

Pls. ignore this mail. Sorry for the disturbance. Best Regards, Leaf ___ Softwires mailing list Softwires@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Re: [Softwires] [softwire] #5: Problems of MAP-T and MAP-E with sites that already use subnet ID = 0 (was: Inapplicability of MAP-T+E to sites that have already assigned subnet ID = 0)

Remi, a site already using subnet 0 may require renumbering. would you be satisfied if the draft said so? cheers, Ole On Jul 23, 2012, at 10:39 , softwire issue tracker wrote: #5: Problems of MAP-T and MAP-E with sites that already use subnet ID = 0 Changes (by remi.despres@…): *

Re: [Softwires] 6rd Multicast

So there is. I had forgotten. So: will the WG consider adopting draft-tsou-softwire-6rd-multicast as a WG deliverable? And if the WG so decides, the Sarikaya approach could also be added to the draft with a discussion of the realm of applicability of the respective drafts. Tom Taylor On