Before making such comparison (of course it should be as fair as possible), I think we need to state what solution space we are targeting and what category mode we should take care. If I understand correctly, I would paraphrase as following categories.
a) Stateful+Dynamic port sets: e.g. DS-Lite b) Stateful+Static port set: e.g. draft-cui-softwire-host-4over6-06 c) Stateless + Static port set: e.g. 4rd, 4via6 translation d) Stateless + Dynamic port set: ??(Any candidate solution?) Gang 2011/7/29, Rémi Després <[email protected]>: > Dear all, > > Dave rightly expresses in the Softwire meeting the need to separate/clarify > discussion about: > - Stateless vs stateful > – Static vs dynamic port sets > > The need to clarify is IMHO even larger than that. > > I therefore worked out a way to present the range of solutions to be > compared, with the following taken in consideration: > - The stateless/stateful IPv4 across IPv6 comparison isn't limited to IPv4 > shared addresses (applies also to exclusive IPv4 customer addresses). > - If there is, in BR/AFBR's, no Customer state (i.e. no states referring to > individual IPv6 prefixes), there can't be per-transport-connection state > either. > - CE-CE direct paths are possible only if IPv4/IPv6 mappings of BR/AFBR's > don't depend on Customer state. > > The proposed document structure is as follows, with pros and cons for each > section: > a) Stateful per transport connection (and also stateful per customer IPv6 > prefix) > e.g. DS-lite with CGN > b) Stateful per customer IPv6 prefix (but Stateless per transport > connection) > e.g. draft-cui-softwire-host-4over6-06 > c) Stateless per customer IPv6 prefix (and also stateless per transport > connection) > - Hub-an-spoke > TBD > - Direct CE-CE paths (mesh) > . Encapsulation based > e.g. draft-murakami-softwire-4rd-00 alias > . Translation based > e.g. draft-murakami-softwire-4v6-translation-00 > > Thoughts? > > Regards, > RD > > > > Le 28 juil. 2011 à 21:45, Dave Thaler a écrit : > >> Attaching here since they don't seem to be posted yet. >> >> -Dave >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >>> Behalf Of Satoru Matsushima >>> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 1:29 PM >>> To: [email protected] list >>> Subject: [Softwires] Yesterday's slides >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Could someone tell me where is Dave Thaler's slides? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> --satoru >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Softwires mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires >> >> <Framing Discussion.pdf>_______________________________________________ >> Softwires mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
