Hi Mohamed,
Please see inline.
Med: Since the request come from 3GPP, the applicability of the solution
SHOULD NOT be beyond that scope. Furthermore, the draft should at least
provide a background on the main recommendations of 3GPP SI: DS and IPv6-only
and that the proposal can be used
Hi Ahmad:
On 5/11/10 9:38 PM, Ahmad Muhanna ahmad.muha...@ericsson.com wrote:
Hi Sri,
-Original Message-
From: softwires-boun...@ietf.org
[mailto:softwires-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sri Gundavelli
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 6:26 PM
To: Joel M. Halpern
Cc: softwires
Hi Hui,
On 12/6/09 2:18 AM, Hui Deng denghu...@gmail.com wrote:
It's quite clear same as you said here, there are binary codes and codec codes
which need additioinal payment for updating, it's a existing scenario.
I do not understand this response. I'm not a codec or a DSP expert, but I
,
2009/12/5 Sri Gundavelli sgund...@cisco.com:
Hi Hui,
1. DS-lite has an important property, making IPv4 address some what
irrelevant in the context of IP routing and just make it a simple state in
two places, the mobile node and the NAT44 gateway. Its allowing the network
to migrate
, Sri,
Thanks for the discussion, inline please
2009/12/4 Sri Gundavelli sgund...@cisco.com:
Hi Hui:
You and Bo touched a very important point. Your point is that DS-lite is
just about IPv4 address exhaust and not about migration. You already heard
from Alain and that's the best source
Hi Hui:
You and Bo touched a very important point. Your point is that DS-lite is
just about IPv4 address exhaust and not about migration. You already heard
from Alain and that's the best source. But, I'll comment in the context of
mobile architectures and application of GI-DS-lite.
1. DS-lite
Hi Hui,
On 12/2/09 7:20 AM, Hui Deng denghu...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, Sri,
inline please,
2009/12/2 Sri Gundavelli sgund...@cisco.com:
Hi Hui,
Now, we are closing down on identifying the gap.
1.) IPv6 App communicating with an IPv6 App
2.) IPv4 App communicating with an IPv4 App
nick.heat...@t-mobile.co.uk
To: Hui Deng denghu...@gmail.com; Sri Gundavelli sgund...@cisco.com;
alain_dur...@cable.comcast.com
Cc: softwires@ietf.org
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 12:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Softwires] Host based translation: v4-v6
Hi, Good day to you all.
I hope you
Hi Xiangsong,
Please see inline for one clarification.
In this situation, NAT is necessary, I do agree your opinion that PNAT
is moving NAT function from network to UEs, but this approach may be
good or bad.
Advantage: it can improve end-to-end transparency and simplify network,
Hi Bo,
The discussion slightly digressed. But, its fine and for this comment,
its
not really true that host translation will preserve end-to-end
transparency.
That is a myth. Any time Hui's PNAT host with its IPv6 transport
communicates with an IPv4 host on
On 12/1/09 2:32 PM, Behcet Sarikaya behcetsarik...@yahoo.com wrote:
We do not initiate tunnels from MAG to CGN. The gateway in the Gateway
initiated DS lite is not the first hop router, such as MAG, but a
router at the end of the mobility tunnel. We also dont initiate tunnels
from UE.
Hi Hui,
Please see inline.
On 11/29/09 10:40 PM, Hui Deng denghu...@gmail.com wrote:
You are talking about the UE to UE for the overlapping IPv4 case. As I
explained in my long email earlier, we support the case for UE to UE
non-overlapping case. For the case of overlapping there are no
12 matches
Mail list logo
