Hi Tina, Please see inline. Cheers Med
________________________________ De : Tina TSOU [mailto:[email protected]] Envoyé : vendredi 26 août 2011 04:35 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP; Jacni Qin Cc : [email protected] Objet : RE: [Softwires] Comments on draft-qin-softwire-dslite-multicast-04 Hi Med, In line with [TT2]. Best Regards, [SNIP] [Med] Using the same mPrefix64 for both encap and translation is not recommended in draft-boucadair-* as you can read in the following excerpt: " IPv4-IPv6 encapsulator and translator may be embedded in the same device or even implemented with the same software module. In order to help the function whether an encapsulated IPv6 multicast packets or translated IPv6 ones are to be transferred. It was tempting to define an S-bit for that purpose but this choice has been abandoned in favor of the recommendation to use distinct MPREFIX64 for each scheme." I don't see an issue here. [TT2] Since encapsulation and translation use different mPrefix64, it is not an issue in draft-qin-* now. But draft-boucadair-* does not specify how to make mPrefix64 different for encapsulation and translation. Do you think it is needed? Med: I confirm this is not an issue for draft-qin. In draft-boucadair, we can for sure clarify more and state "the operator of the v4/v6 multicast intercinnection nodes configures two distinct mPREFIX64, ..." _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
