> Absolutely. L2TP tunnels are widely use in many areas including 4over6. > The motivation of this draft is to extend dslite to re-use the same > framework to provision a public IP to the B4 element and the AFTR not to > NAT. I agree RFC5571 can achieve the same objective, but this will make > the deployment easier to do two functions on the AFTR. Does this make > sense to you?
Yiu explained this to me during PCP, and I think I get it now. this is for the case where one has already deployed DS-lite to a customer. for whatever reason DS-lite fails for this end user (e.g. some application doesn't work through the CGN). 4over6 provides a solution for provisioning a non NATed non port restricted public IPv4 address to this end user. seems to me a very valid use case and something we should measure all of the 4 over 6 mechanisms (ds-lite, 4rd, divi...) against. cheers, Ole _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
