Hi,

>> It seems to me, when delegating CE ipv6 prefix, a longest match might
>> be used. But when forwarding a IPv4 packet, a longest match is
>> useless, because domain 4rd prefixes don't overlap.
>
> Why? Sorry, I don't follow. The domain IPv4 prefixes can overlap.

if domain 4rd prefixes overlap, when a CE forwards a ipv4 package, it
will get confused. because, let's say, two rules matched, it doesn't
know which domain ipv6 prefix is used to build outer ipv6 destination
address.

Thanks,
washam
> Cheers,
> Jacni
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> washam
>>
>> 2011/8/17 Rémi Després<[email protected]>:
>>>
>>> Le 17 août 2011 à 03:10, Jacni Qin a écrit :
>>>
>>>> hi Remi,
>>>>
>>>> On 8/16/2011 4:27 PM, Rémi Després wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>> As already discussed privately, I don't know realistic cases where two
>>>>> rules would have IPv6 or IPv4 overlapping prefixes.
>>>>> Consequently, it seems that "longest" match, while being permitted,
>>>>> doesn't need to be a requirement.
>>>>
>>>> If there are multiple ways for CPE to decide the IPv6 prefix, we have to
>>>> specify the order of priority. e.g., firstly check if there is any
>>>> implication assigned along with the rules, no? then choose the "longest"
>>>> match.
>>>> BTW, I think the longest match is not bad.
>>>
>>> It isn't bad, agreed, because it gives the same result as first match
>>> when prefixes don't overlap.
>>> It shouldn't however be made a _requirement_ if there is no well
>>> understood use case because that additional complexity, small but real.
>>>
>>> Whether there may be realistic configurations where prefix overlap is
>>> useful remains AFAIK an open question.
>>> I have serious doubts, but no time now to argue in details.
>>> IMHO, It's up to those who argue in favor of longest match to provide at
>>> least one realistic example (if there is one).
>>> Then we will agree (or discuss).
>>> Is that fair?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> RD
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Softwires mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
>>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to