On Aug 20, 2011, at 9:04 AM, Rémi Després wrote: > > Le 20 août 2011 à 11:46, Mark Townsley a écrit : > >> On Aug 20, 2011, at 3:20 AM, Rémi Després wrote: > >>> Le 20 août 2011 à 03:55, Mark Townsley a écrit : > ... >>>> we're already confused: >>>> >>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-softwire-cgn-bypass-03 >>> >>> Could you explain more which confusion you are referring to? >> >> Nejc suggested that DS-Lite without NATs (which I assumed meant without a >> CGN NAT, aka AFTR) would be confusing at this stage. >> > >> The title of the referenced document is "Procedure to bypass DS-Lite AFTR" > > Indeed, but so what? > (I don't see which confusion would result from using "4rd address mapping" to > designate the stateless mapping called that way so far.)
I'm not sure how many ways I can say this. The comment I was responding to was whether it was "confusing" to take ds-lite and remove the centralized CGN portion while still calling it ds-lite. The point in referencing the other document is that ds-lite itself has already done this by having a mode that removes the CGN. - Mark > > RD > >
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
