Dear Remi-san, Thank you for your comments. Please see inline below.
* On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 10:25:03 +0100 * Remi Despres <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Masataka-san, > > 1. > Thank you for sharing your interesting experience with the JPIX trial service > based on 464XLAT. > Could you, for clarification, describe in more details formats of XLAT > prefixes in this trial? IPv6 address for translation have IPv4 address embedded in the low-order 32 bits of the IPv6 address, as you well know. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mawatari-softwire-464xlat-02#section-6.1 I might not understand what you want to know. I described 464XLAT address translation chart here. source IPv4 address +-----------------------------+ | IPv4 [global] (32bit) | | [assigned to IPv4 pool@PLAT]| +--------+ +-----------------------------+ | IPv4 | destination IPv4 address | server | +-----------------------------+ +--------+ | IPv4 [global] (32bit) | ^ + [assigned to IPv4 server] | | +-----------------------------+ +--------+ | PLAT | Stateful XLATE (v4:v6=1:n) +--------+ ^ | source IPv6 address (IPv6 cloud) +--------------------------------------+-----------------------------+ | XLAT prefix for src (96bit) | IPv4 [private] (32bit) | | [assigned to each consumer of ISP] | [assigned to IPv4 client] | +--------------------------------------+-----------------------------+ destination IPv6 address +--------------------------------------+-----------------------------+ | XLAT prefix for dst (96bit) | IPv4 [global] (32bit) | | [assigned to PLAT] | [assiend to IPv4 server] | +--------------------------------------+-----------------------------+ (IPv6 cloud) ^ | +--------+ | CLAT | Stateless XLATE (v4:v6=1:1) +--------+ ^ source IPv4 address | +-----------------------------+ +--------+ | IPv4 [private] (32bit) | | IPv4 | | [assigned to IPv4 client] | | client | +-----------------------------+ +--------+ destination IPv4 address +-----------------------------+ | IPv4 [global] (32bit) | + [assigned to IPv4 server] | +-----------------------------+ additional reference (sorry, a bit outdated) http://www.apricot.net/apricot2011/media/Masataka_Mawatari_IPv6v4_Exchange_Service_for_sharing_IPv4_address.pdf > 2. > Objectives of 464XLAT and 4rd-U look very similar (ref > draft-despres-softwire-4rd-u-01). > > Indeed: > - Both use "DHCPv6 prefix delegation or another method" to inform CLAT/CEs of > their IPv6 prefixes. > - Both "can implement traffic engineering based on IPv4 source address and > IPv4 destination address" (a feature that, as noted in your draft, is missing > in encapsulation). > > OTOH, unless I miss something, 464XLAT doesn't provide incoming connectivity > of CLATs in case of shared IPv4 addresses (while 4rd-U does provide it to > CEs). In this respect 4rd-U seems functionally more complete. > > Thoughts? > > > Regards, > RD Kind Regards, Masataka MAWATARI -- Japan Internet Exchange MAWATARI Masataka <[email protected]> tel:+81-3-3243-9579 _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
