Wg,
As chairs, We¹ve been looking at the MTU thread on 6rd. There has been many
good points made and we have had an healthy discussion. It is now time to move
on with the base spec. MTU is one of the many operational issues with 6rd. The
chairs and the authors discussed a while back to have
Please send me and David a note if you plan to present something at the
upcoming IETF softwires wg meeting.
- Alain.
___
Softwires mailing list
Softwires@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
The Tombstone was missing, the actual draft under last call is available
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-softwire-ds-lite-tunnel-option-01.txt
I apologize for the confusion. The Softwire WG last call deadline remain
2010.02.19 at 1700 PST
- Alain, the other co-chair
On 2/4/10 3:46 PM,
A new version of the DHCPv6 option for DS-lite has been published. I¹ve
asked the authors to publish it as:
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-softwire-ds-lite-tunnel-option-00.txt
This should address all the issues raised in Hiroshima.
- Alain.
___
On 12/8/09 1:05 PM, Cameron Byrne cb.li...@gmail.com wrote:
I won't say DS-lite is easy or not, but i will say native IPv6 or
native dual stack on the UE is easier than DS-Lite.
I think it really depends on the wireless architecture, how many layers of
tunnel are already in place and where
In our case, we have:
* many millions of edge devices (similar to your UE)
* thousands of routers
* thousands of servers
With those numbers in mind, it is easy to see that the pain is in finding
IPv4 addresses for edge devices, not for routers or servers.
In our case, taking IPv4 away on
On 12/3/09 1:54 AM, bo zhou zhoub...@gmail.com wrote:
[Bo] I agree DS-lite makes E2E transparency argument. But left part I do not
agree. Host-based translation can make the applications running through the
transport network transparency, never care what kind of transport network
(IPv4,
of subscriber?
wouldn't such scope definition is too complex, not easy work for the
operations?
thanks
-Hui
2009/11/25 Durand, Alain alain_dur...@cable.comcast.com:
Say you know both v4 v6 prefixes associated to the scope.
Say you want to communicate with node B with that v4 scope.
You
Please remember that this list has a policy to restrict posts to
subscribers. There is also limit on the number of recipient (before it is
considered spam) and on the size of the messages. Nothing out of the
standard for IETF lists.
- Alain.
___
, at 08:53, Durand, Alain wrote:
4 could be a very straightforward extension of DS-lite. If you know the
common IPv6 prefix shared by adjacent nodes, you can directly tunnel to
them.
In practice, you¹ll have a default route to the AFTR and a subnet route for
the ³local² prefix.
Also
...
- Alain.
On 11/23/09 1:10 PM, james woodyatt j...@apple.com wrote:
On Nov 23, 2009, at 08:53, Durand, Alain wrote:
4 could be a very straightforward extension of DS-lite. If you know the
common IPv6 prefix shared by adjacent nodes, you can directly tunnel to them.
In practice, you¹ll have
The draft agenda of IETF75 is available at: The Draft agenda is now
available at:
http://www.ietf.org/meetings/75/
As of today, we are scheduled on Tuesday pm.
Please send your agenda item request to me and David ASAP.
- Alain.
___
Softwires mailing
If you intend to present at IETF74, let us, me and Dave Ward, know ASAP (by
this Friday at the latest) and send your slides.
- Alain.
___
Softwires mailing list
Softwires@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
13 matches
Mail list logo
