2011/8/17 Nejc Škoberne <[email protected]> > Dear authors, > > as far as I can understand your draft, you make NAPT44 in the CE > obligatory. > However, this is not the case for 4rd, dIVI, SA46T-AS and Lightweight > 4over6 A+P > drafts. So I suggest that you make it optional in 4via6 translation as > well, since it might > be desired for some environments to connect hosts supporting 4via6 > translation > technology, directly to the IPv6 network. In this case, you don't need the > translator. >
It's useful to note that the implementation of any A+P based scheme on an end host has practical challenges, irrespective of what drafts say (just think of two such host on the same LAN - something that is not allowed) If it helps think of any of 4rd, 4V6, dIVI-PD, as having the same applicability, but practically being most suitable for a CE alongside NAPT44 (which all rely on to provide address sharing) -Wojciech > > Thanks, > Nejc > ______________________________**_________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/softwires<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires> >
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
