Hi Washam, Don't forget there are also Softwire Hub-and-Spoke (L2TPv2 based) and 6rd+. So far, we don't hear much response to support this work in the operator's community.
Regards, Yiu On 9/27/10 9:49 PM, "WashamFan" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Please see inline. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> > Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 4:17 am > Subject: Re: [Softwires] comments on draft-carpenter-softwire-sample-00 > To: WashamFan <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > > >> Hi, >> >> On 2010-09-27 21:05, WashamFan wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> It says, >>> >>> The SAMPLE server will act as an IPv6 router. In the simplest case, >>> it will forward all IPv6 packets to a default route, except those >>> whose destination address lies within the PSAMPLE prefix, which >> will >>> be encapsulated and sent towards the host (CPE) and port >> indicated by >>> the V4ADDR and PN values. >>> >>> >>> I think it is not appropriate to assume NAT traversal without >>> relay can be always successful. >> >> I don't understand your comment. If you have a NAT that you cannot >> traverse with UDP, you have many other problems, not just a lack >> of IPv6 connectivity. > > I misunderstood. I thought the text implies direct tunnels established > instead of hairpinning via SAMPLE server when SAMPLE client to > SAMPLE client communication occurs . > >>> Hairpinning might be always used >>> for simplicity. >> >> Yes, that is the SAMPLE model. And it's a discussion for the >> community whether or not this is acceptable. >> >>> >>> I'd like to know the status of the draft, is the WG pursuing this >>> work? >> >> There are three drafts aiming at the same problem, SAMPLE, >> draft-lee-softwire-6rd-udp, and draft-despres-softwire-6rdplus. >> Please hold your breath, there's hope of a joint proposal >> from several authors within a few days. > > Is it possible to combine all these efforts? I see 2 major > difference between draft-carpenter-softwire-sample-00 > and draft-lee-softwire-6rd-udp-02 at least: > > 1. According to the IPv6 address assignment, SAMPLE > is to connect isolated IPv6 hosts but 6rd-udp is to connect > both isolated IPv6 hosts and LANs. > > 2. They are different in terms of IPv6 address assignment > procedure. SAMPLE uses ND but 6rd-udp might use RADIUS, > let's say. > > Personally, I think it is meaningful to work on tunneling > IPv6 traversing NAT, but I think we should justify the work > by clarifying how bad Teredo did the job before we reinvent > the wheel. > > THanks, > washam > > >> Brian >> > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
