Oops, e) to be deleted from the list below (same feature as c)) Le 7 sept. 2011 à 11:02, Rémi Després a écrit :
> Hi Med, > > Thank you for the detailed analysis of our draft. > Please see some first comments in line. > > Le 7 sept. 2011 à 07:22, <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> a écrit : > >> Hi Jacni, >> >> Please see inline. >> >> Cheers, >> Med >> >> De : Jacni Qin [mailto:[email protected]] >> Envoyé : mardi 6 septembre 2011 11:30 >> À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP >> Cc : Wojciech Dec; [email protected] >> Objet : Re: [Softwires] Analysis of Port Indexing Algorithms >> (draft-bsd-softwire-stateless-port-index-analysis) >> >> hi Med, all, >> >> Thanks for writing this, it helps. >> A couple of quick comments below, >> >> *) Is the focus of the document (properties used) on the whole address >> architecture/format, or just on the algorithms to build port sets? As in >> some proposals, for example 4rd, the port indexing algorithm can be an >> independent part and decoupled from the address format. >> [Med] All port indexing schemes are independent of the address format >> itself, but we included some properties to reflect some design choices made >> my the authors of these solutions on the address format. FWIW, we will >> submit soon a list of requirements to be followed by stateless >> address/prefix format. > > IMHO, separating port-set indexing and IPv6 address format would be a > clarification. > Here is a tentative contribution in this direction. > > Major criteria to evaluate port-indexing methods: > a) Fairness (no CPE gets well-known ports 0-1023) > b) RTP/RTCP compatibility > c) Stateless BR support of multiple CPE-port-set sizes > d) UPnP friendliness (interleaved port sets) > e) Support of differentiated sharing ratios without per-CPE states in BRs > > > Major criteria to evaluate IPv6 address formats of CPEs: > i) Compatibility with IPv4 routes between CPEs as direct as IPv6 routes. > (This implies A+P->IPv6 derivation without per-CPE state) > j) No impact on the assignment plan of IPv6 prefixes to CPE's. (This excludes > in particular full IPv4 addresses in CPE IPv6 prefixes.) > k) Optional support of CPE cascades (the suffix field of the 4rd mapping > proposals, explained in the 4rd-addmapping draft) > > OTOH, complexity comparisons, although worth keeping in mind at this stage, > are premature (largely subjective before optimized codes have been worked on > for stabilized methods). So far, making sure all methods have AFAIK O(1) > complexity should IMHO be be sufficient. When clear about other criteria, > thin optimization can become relevant. > > > >> *) >> o Multiple Port Ranges: Capability to assign multiple contiguous >> port ranges to a single PRD >> >> Jacni>: I guess this only applies to "portrange" which offers contiguous >> port-set. So, I would suggest removing this property. >> [Med] Ok. >> >> *) For "despres-4rd", >> Differentiated Port Sets Supported, through different piece of rules, >> delegated CPE prefixes of different length. >> [Med] the concern is more on the border router side, can you please check if >> the operations are still stateless at the border side? > > Yes, still stateless. > The BR doesn't need to know the length of a CPE prefix to build an address > that starts with the CPE prefix. > It may have bits beyond the CPE prefix, but the CPE ignores them. > > Kind regards, > RD > > > >> BTW, I'm envisaging having two properties here: >> >> (1) Differentiated Port Sets (network level) >> (2) Differentiated Port Sets (bound to the same shared address) >> >> IPv4 traffic Isolation supported >> [Med] Ok. This is supported by assigning two prefixes. > > IPv4 traffic is recognized by the fact that Interface ID is a 4rd IID (sec > 5.3) >> >> Prefix Aggregation supported, since the IPv6 address planning is not >> affected. >> [Med] Ok. >> >> I'll come back to you later if I get more. >> >> >> Cheers, >> Jacni >> >> On Tuesday, September 06, 2011 12:44:48 AM, >> [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> We have just submitted an I-D analysing the port set algorithms we have on >>> the table. A set of properties are used to characterize the port set >>> algorithms. >>> >>> This is a call for review. In particular, we invite authors of the >>> following proposals to review their section: >>> >>> o [I-D.boucadair-behave-ipv6-portrange] >>> o [I-D.xli-behave-divi] >>> o [I-D.murakami-softwire-4v6-translation] >>> o [I-D.murakami-softwire-4rd] >>> o [I-D.despres-softwire-4rd-addmapping] >>> >>> Questions, suggestions, corrections and contributions are more than welcome. >>> >>> Thank you. >>> Cheers, >>> Med >>> >>> >>> -----Message d'origine----- >>> De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >>> De la part de [email protected] >>> Envoyé : lundi 5 septembre 2011 18:33 >>> À : [email protected] >>> Objet : I-D Action: draft-bsd-softwire-stateless-port-index-analysis-00.txt >>> >>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>> directories. >>> >>> Title : Analysis of Port Indexing Algorithms >>> Author(s) : Mohamed Boucadair >>> Nejc Skoberne >>> Wojciech Dec >>> Filename : draft-bsd-softwire-stateless-port-index-analysis-00.txt >>> Pages : 25 >>> Date : 2011-09-05 >>> >>> This document analyzes various algorithm proposals for building port >>> sets. These algorithms are used to encode the range of ports in an >>> IPv6 address and prefix in the context of stateless solutions. The >>> ultimate goal of this analysis is to converge on one or a set of >>> algorithms to be used by all stateless solutions. >>> >>> This is a companion document to >>> [I-D.boucadair-softwire-stateless-rfc6052-update]. >>> >>> >>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bsd-softwire-stateless-port-index-analysis-00.txt >>> >>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>> >>> This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: >>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bsd-softwire-stateless-port-index-analysis-00.txt >>> _______________________________________________ >>> I-D-Announce mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >>> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >>> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Softwires mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires >> _______________________________________________ >> Softwires mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires >
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
