Jan, Interesting enough, the static port-set is one of the reasons why many find 4v6 being so useful.
Cheers, Rajiv > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Jan Zorz @ go6.si > Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 5:26 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Softwires] Clarification of the stateles/stateful discussion > > On 7/30/11 3:38 PM, Satoru Matsushima wrote: > > On 2011/07/30, at 8:26, Peng Wu wrote: > >>> > >>> 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?) > >> > >> I would say that the last one makes no sense > > > > Agree. It is a problem space only on that logical frame. > > I think that the analysis work doesn't need to insist necessity of > unfeasible area solution. > > Well, A+P got enormous amounts of criticism because there was no dynamic > allocations of additional ports. > > Now we don't need that anymore, just because stateless solution can't > handle it by design? > > I love stateless a+p flavors, but imho we'll need both solutions, > stateless and statefull and both of them with dynamic port ranges or > sets, whatever you might call them. > > Cheers, Jan Zorz > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
