Hi Rémi, all, Since there is only an excerpt of e-mails, I lost the context.
Could you please clarify what is the issue discussed here? Thanks. Cheers, Med > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Rémi Després [mailto:despres.r...@laposte.net] > Envoyé : jeudi 3 novembre 2011 10:05 > À : Jacni Qin > Cc : Alain Durand; Ole Troan; BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP; > Satoru Matsushima; Softwires WG > Objet : Keeping support of CE IPv4 prefixes in the v4/v6 > address mapping? > > > Le 3 nov. 2011 à 09:50, Jacni Qin a écrit : > >>> if the MAP just covers "shared address with one single > sharing ratio for one domain", > >>> the design will be greatly simplified? > >> Requiring ISPs to maintain IPv4 routing in their networks, > just to serve the few users that need to keep IPv4 prefixes, > seems to me a step backward. > >> > >> Besides, I have serious doubts about "greatly simplified". > > I mean for the design of the address/port mapping > algorithm, not the transport mechanism. > > Yes, but I don't see the great simplification of the algorithm. > Keeping it general enough to support IPv4 prefixes is AFAIK > easy. It doesn't prevent deployments where, IPv4 prefixes > being not supported, fields can be at places that may be > found more convenient. > > Maybe you can be more specific on your concern. > > Cheers, > RD > > _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list Softwires@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
