so you are proposing assign different IPv4 address to the DS-Lite host, is this public or private?
I still don't understand how this tunneling could be setup between hosts? thanks -Hui 2009/11/24 Durand, Alain <[email protected]>: > Yes... Whenever you do the shortcuts, you bump into the non trivial > questions to know who you are talking to... > Now, if v4 addresses are allocated via DHCPv4 over the IPv6 tunnel, this > problem can be solved. Is it worth the effort or not depend on how much the > shortcuts are going to save you... > > - Alain. > > > On 11/23/09 1:10 PM, "james woodyatt" <[email protected]> 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 a default route to the AFTR and a subnet route for >>> the ³local² prefix. >> >> Also, to support the direct host-to-host tunneling, the DS-lite extension >> would need to allow for many DS-lite subscribers to share a single IPv4 >> private address realm. I think DS-lite currently requires that each IPv6 >> subscriber is isolated within their own IPv4 private address realm, and >> therefore a twice-NAT44 gateway is required for IPv4-only applications to >> communicate between DS-lite subscribers. >> >> >> -- >> james woodyatt <[email protected]> >> member of technical staff, communications engineering >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
