> I think I don't get you wrong, and actually I believe your pioneer work on the > subject has been quite useful.
Well said, Remi. +1. Cheers, Rajiv > -----Original Message----- > From: Rémi Després [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 11:06 AM > To: Jan Zorz go6.si > Cc: Softwires-wg; Rajiv Asati (rajiva) > Subject: Re: [Softwires] Clarification of the stateles/stateful discussion > > > Le 1 août 2011 à 16:31, Jan Zorz @ go6.si a écrit : > > > On 8/1/11 4:22 PM, Rémi Després wrote: > >> > >> Le 1 août 2011 à 15:36, Rajiv Asati (rajiva) a écrit : > >> > >>> ... Interesting enough, the static port-set is one of the reasons why many > >>> find 4v6 being so useful. > >> > >> Indeed: operation simplicity, scalability, possible direct CE-CE paths. > >> Very legitimate. > > > > Let me repeat, what was "thrown" at us, when writing ymbk-aplusp: > > > > "what happens, if customer behind CPE that shares IPv4 address runs out of > ports? Does this mean that all his additional traffic from this point does not > go anywhere? To end customer, this looks like broken internet connectivity." > > Thanks for the quotation. > What was "thrown" to you doesn't seem right, and needs to be challenged. > > Answer to the question: > - The customer doesn't run out of ports because it has an exclusive private > IPv4 address. > - If the CPE NAT44 runs out of ports, is just does what it does today in the > same situation. > In addition, the probability of the CPE running out of IPv4 ports in a dual- > stack-service site having 4K ports needs not be higher than in an IPv4-only > site having 64K ports. > > > > Don't get me wrong, just repeating what we needed to solve in order to move > on from that point. > > I think I don't get you wrong, and actually I believe your pioneer work on the > subject has been quite useful. > It is just that what you felt obliged to solve isn't in reality needed in a > significant number of legitimate use cases. > > > > Basically, to solve that we needed to introduce states at some point. > > If we can solve this issue on stateless solution, I'm all for it. > > See above. > > Cheers, > RD > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
