Q1: Why
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-softwire-stateless-requiremen>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-softwire-stateless-requiremen
ts-00, is off the agenda list?
IMO, this is something exactly deals with fundamental requirements for
the design of all stateless 4/6 solutions, thereby helping us moving
forward to decide working direction.
This starting point of the discussion is taken as a given
Q2: Why
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-deng-v6ops-aplusp-experiment-results-01>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-deng-v6ops-aplusp-experiment-results-01
, is off the agenda list?
which would offer first-hand information we educated and learnt from
pioneer stateless 4/6 solution deployment.
Yes, this one should be discussed on the 1st session
Regard 2: Focus on comparisons between approaches instead of going into
bits of *only one* of them.
Q3: Why
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite-01>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite-01,
is on the list, while the
<http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhou-softwire-b4-nat-02.txt>http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhou-softwire-b4-nat-02.txt,
which works
on exactly the same direction, is off the list?
I might have missed it but I did not receive a request from the authors of this
draft to present it.
Curious about the reasons and thanks to your answers in advance!
Alain.
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
