Ok. I agree with your definition. How about I rephrase it that dslite and 4over6 don't require control channel. RFC5571 requires control channel. Can we agree that control channel requires extra overhead?
Cheers, /Yiu On 3/31/11 4:37 AM, "Ole Troan" <[email protected]> wrote: >Yiu, > >> The way to set up the tunnel is similar to ds-lite. The CPE will learn >>the >> TC's v6 address, then encap v4 packets into v6 to the TC. To create the >> v4-v6 mapping in the TC's routing table. This could be done by the TC to >> look at the dhcp message or by keepalive packets from the cpe. We >>haven't >> decided which way is preferred. But the tunnel itself is stateless. > >since we have tended to classify mechanisms into 'stateless' and >'stateful'. I think we need a common understanding of what mean by these >terms. > >simply stated, if the mechanism scales by the number of >subscribers/tunnels then it is stateful. if it scales by the amount of >packets/traffic then it is stateless. > >if you agree with that definition I would think 4over6 is stateful, since >it suggests to integrate the tunnel state into the RIB. i.e. you allocate >a piece of memory per subscriber and you have to snoop on DHCP messages >to refresh this state. > >cheers, >Ole _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
