In your previous mail you wrote:
Here are some questions about the demo and SD-NAT.
1. As I see, the bindings of v6 and v4+ports are deterministic and
pre-configured on the AFTR. Will it be of great cost if they are installed
using NETCONF which is mentioned in one of
In your previous mail you wrote:
What was the use case for non-contigous port sets?
= cf draft-tsou-softwire-port-set-algorithms-analysis-01.txt
A good port set definition algorithm must be reversible, easy to
implement, and should be able to define non-continuous or random port
On 3/27/12 4:02 AM, Francis Dupont francis.dup...@fdupont.fr wrote:
In your previous mail you wrote:
What was the use case for non-contigous port sets?
= cf draft-tsou-softwire-port-set-algorithms-analysis-01.txt
A good port set definition algorithm must be reversible, easy to
Hi Francis,
A quick question: why is there a SD-CGN? Do you mean the second NAT at
AFTR used to reshape the out-of-range source port into the restricted port
range?
If so, IMHO it is stateful, not using an algorithm. And I think it
still doesn't solve the security issue.
Please
In your previous mail you wrote:
A quick question: why is there a SD-CGN? Do you mean the second NAT at
AFTR used to reshape the out-of-range source port into the restricted port
range?
= there must be a SD-CGN which:
- filter from SD-CPE to the Internet packets checking the SD-CPE
The principle is good, details are not:
- only switched (giga) Ethernets were used (no wireless)
- the PCP should get double arrow
- all SD-B4s run a PCP/NAT-PMP/UPnP-GID-v1+v2 server
(in fact they have the same kind of softwares, the laptop just offers
more tools, 1 times larger
Hi Francis,
i work out a topology of your system according to your description, and
hopes to help those who can't make it to your demo with a quick understanding
of the system.
Please correct me if i'm missing anything or misunderstanding your points.
The attachment is the txt
In your previous mail you wrote:
Great. So ISC already has DHCPv4 over IPv6 implementation now.
= yes but it is experimental: we don't use the IANA assigned number
for CRA6ADDR for instance (as IANA will be involved later in the IETF
process) and there are some interesting technical problems
Is this the same room as IAOC/IAD?
--
Tassos
On 24/3/2012 5:37 ??, Alistair Woodman wrote:
All, you are cordially invited...
Francis Dupont, Paul Selkirk and Alain Durant are hosting a live demo
of draft-penno-softwire-sdnat-02.
The following will be shown:
1) Stateless DS-Lite
2)
All, you are cordially invited.
Francis Dupont, Paul Selkirk and Alain Durant are hosting a live demo of
draft-penno-softwire-sdnat-02.
The following will be shown:
1) Stateless DS-Lite
2) Stateless CPE B4 NAT
3) Anycast Failover
4) DHCPv4 proxy over v6
5) NAT Port range
Durand with a 'd' (as sensible as Dupont with a 't' :-)!
Francis Dupont fdup...@isc.org
___
Softwires mailing list
Softwires@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
Great. So ISC already has DHCPv4 over IPv6 implementation now.
//Pity I couldn't make it on Sunday.
2012/3/25 Alistair Woodman awood...@isc.org:
All, you are cordially invited…
Francis Dupont, Paul Selkirk and Alain Durant are hosting a live demo of
draft-penno-softwire-sdnat-02.
The
Thanks for the demo.
Would you please also give a summary to the mailing list, especially for
someone who cannot join the demo.
Yong
From: Alistair Woodman awood...@isc.org
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 09:37:53 -0700
To: softwires@ietf.org
Cc: fdup...@isc.org
Subject: [Softwires] Demo of
13 matches
Mail list logo
