Hi Cameron, Pls see below.
----- Original Message ---- > From: Cameron Byrne <[email protected]> > To: Hui Deng <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, December 5, 2009 3:37:21 PM > Subject: Re: [Softwires] Host based translation: v4-v6 > > >> Bottom line, we touched about the core aspects and also one use-case that > >> you say is the key motivation for your chosen approach, which the use-case > >> itself is debatable and a clear solution exists as many folks pointed out, > >> enable dual-stack on the server, or use IPv6. We also talked about the key > >> resulting benefits in each of the solutions. As far I see it, when > > As far as I can see, the technical argument about our motivation > > hasn't been questioned any more. > > And for solutions, you already agreed that you are no supporting that. > > > >> DS-lite/GI-DS-lite is applied to mobile architectures, we have all the > >> required tools for migration. > > I guess that this is only said by one people, every other people has > > different opinion on this. > > Make that 2, i agree with Sri I think we have to be careful in reaching conclusions on this case. Alain wrote in his mail which I quote here: In our case, we have: * many millions of edge devices (similar to your UE) * thousands of routers * thousands of servers So your mileage with DS-Lite varies according to how much your network fits into the above proportions. If you exactly have the above, DS-Lite fits you best. In mobile networks, this translates into operators asking all base stations to be IPv6-enabled and support/use IPv6 in applications like backhauling. Otherwise base stations are Layer 2 devices so you don't get a lot of mileage from DS-Lite. In fact it is very easy/straightforward to deploy DS-Lite in mobile networks. There is nothing wrong with this conclusion, it is just a fact. Regards, Behcet _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
