Hi Rémi,

I checked draft-despres-softwire-4rd-addmapping again and you reverse only the 
L bits identifying the PSID. This is why I'm puzzled how it is possible to 
support differentiated port sets (which means distinct PSID of distinct length 
e.g., 4 and 6).  

Cheers,
Med 

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Rémi Després [mailto:despres.r...@laposte.net] 
Envoyé : mercredi 14 septembre 2011 08:33
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP
Cc : Softwires-wg
Objet : Re: [Softwires] Analysis of Port Indexing Algorithms 
(draft-bsd-softwire-stateless-port-index-analysis)

Hi Med,

Le 14 sept. 2011 à 07:40, <mohamed.boucad...@orange-ftgroup.com> a écrit :
...
> I didn't get my answer yet. I'm looking for the explanation about the 
> behaviour of an 6/4 interconnection node receiving IPv4 packets destined to 
> CPEs assigned with port sets of different sizes. What is the configuration of 
> that node?

Please see my answer to Satoru-san.
Copy enclosed below.

Cheers,
RD

------------------
The AFTR doesn't need to imply any CPE prefix length to build the right DST 
subnet prefix (64 bits).

Let's take the example of sec. 6 (A), namely:  

  +--------------------+--------------------+-------------------------+
  | Domain IPv4 prefix | Domain IPv6 prefix | AFTR IPv6 subnet (e.g.) |
  +--------------------+--------------------+-------------------------+
  |     192.32../12    |    2001:db0::/28   | 2001:db0:aaaa:aaaa::/64 |
  +--------------------+--------------------+-------------------------+

  +-------------------------+--------------+------------------+-------+
  | CPE IPv6 prefix         | CPE IPv4     | Port-set bit     | Nb of |
  |                         | address      | pattern          | ports |
  +-------------------------+--------------+------------------+-------+
  | 2001:db1:1111:/48       | 192.33.17.17 | NA               | 64K   |
  | 2001:db2:2222:2000::/52 | 192.34.34.34 | yyyyxxxxxxx0100x | 3840  |
  +-------------------------+--------------+------------------+-------+

Let's assume that the AFTR has A+P packets to send to CPE IPv4 addresses 
192.33.17.17 and 192.34.34.34 respectively, and both with dst port 0x4445.

The L port bits to be included in subnet prefixes are then 2888::/15 (reversed 
order port bits 0-14).

Destination subnet prefixes then comprise:
- The Domain IPv6 prefix 2001:db0::/28 
- 32 - 12 = 20 rightmost bits of IPv4 addresses, 1111:1000::/20 and 
2222:2000::/20 respectively
- 2888::/15
- One padding bit set to 0 

They are:
- 2001:db1:1111:2888::/64 
- 2001:db2:2222:2888::/64

Each one starts with the CPE IPv6 prefix of the right dst CPE, which is enough 
to reach it.

Hope it clarifies.
-----------------






> 
> Cheers,
> Med
> 
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Rémi Després [mailto:despres.r...@laposte.net] 
> Envoyé : mardi 13 septembre 2011 19:42
> À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP
> Cc : Softwires-wg
> Objet : Re: [Softwires] Analysis of Port Indexing Algorithms 
> (draft-bsd-softwire-stateless-port-index-analysis)
> 
> 
> Le 13 sept. 2011 à 18:08, <mohamed.boucad...@orange-ftgroup.com> a écrit :
> 
>> Hi Rémi,
>> 
>> Thank you or your answer but my question was not on the CPE side but the 
>> operations at the border router side.
> 
> The point is that, with the new 4rd, an AFTR that sends an IPv4 packet to a 
> CPE doesn't need to know the length of the CPE IPv6 prefix  of that BR.
> This is a major difference with the old 4rd where this length was a rule 
> parameter. (It is now a parameter only with the CPE-cascade option, to be 
> ignored for this discussion.)
> 
> As detailed in Figure 2, the BR includes in the subnet prefix of the IPv6 
> address L bits from the A+P port. 
> This length L is 14 bits unless it has to be limited for this prefix to fit 
> into 64 bits. 
> 
> The result can be a subnet prefix that typically differs from the CPE IPv6 
> prefix, with some extra port bits after the CPE IPv6 prefix. 
> However, because the subnet prefix does start with the CPE IPv6 prefix, the 
> packet reaches the CPE. 
> There, the 4rd IID is enough for the packet to be recognized as a 4rd packet.
> 
> Is this, now, the explanation you were looking for?
> 
> Cheers,
> RD
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Med
>> 
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : Rémi Després [mailto:despres.r...@laposte.net] 
>> Envoyé : lundi 12 septembre 2011 17:05
>> À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP
>> Cc : Softwires-wg
>> Objet : Re: [Softwires] Analysis of Port Indexing Algorithms 
>> (draft-bsd-softwire-stateless-port-index-analysis)
>> 
>> 
>> Le 12 sept. 2011 à 16:18, <mohamed.boucad...@orange-ftgroup.com> 
>> <mohamed.boucad...@orange-ftgroup.com> a écrit :
>>> ... 
>>> To double check the ability of 4rd-addmapping algo to support 
>>> differentiated port sets without any state on the BR, could you please 
>>> provide some examples to show this behaviour? FWIW, below are listed some 
>>> configuration proposals:
>> 
>> With 4rd-addmapping, of port-set sizes are directly derived from lengths of 
>> delegated IPv6 prefixes.
>> Thus, if CPEs A and B have IPv6 prefixes of respective lengths L and L+k, 
>> the port set of B is 2^k times smaller than that of A.
>> 
>> Besides that, IPv6 prefixes are assigned without any constraint coming from 
>> IPv4. 
>> 
>>> (1) Differentiated port sets bound to distinct IPv4 address
>>> * Port sets of 4096 ports when the shared IPv4 belongs to POOL_IPv4@_1
>>> * Port sets of 1024 ports when the shared IPv4 belongs to POOL_IPv4@_2
>>> 
>>> (2) Differentiated port sets bound to the same IPv4 address (Because 0-4095 
>>> range is excluded, (n+1)*4096 + m*1024 = 2^16))
>>> * Port sets of 4096 ports assigned to n  CPEs
>>> * Port sets of 1024 ports assigned to m CPEs
>> 
>> First, note that, because of privileged-port exclusion for fairness, 
>> port-set sizes of 4rd are 15/16 * 2^k.
>> 
>> For (1):
>> - POOL_IPv4@_1 has IPv6 prefixes having 4-bit Port-set IDs (and have 
>> 15/16*4096=3840 ports per CPE).
>> - POOL_IPv4@_1 has IPv6 prefixes having 6-bit Port-set IDs (and have 
>> 15/16*1024=960 ports per CPE).
>> 
>> For (2): Assign IPv6 prefixes of length L to n CPEs, and IPv6 prefixes of 
>> length L+2 to m CPEs.
>> 
>> OK?
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> RD
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
Softwires@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to