Le 3 nov. 2011 à 10:04, Ole Troan a écrit : ... >> 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. > > can you clarify why this? I don't understand why IPv4 routing has to be > maintained just because there is a MAP domain with full IPv4 addresses (or a > rule for full IPv4 addresses)?
I didn't say that. IF the address mapping can't assign IPv4 prefixes to CEs, AND IF an ISP has to support some users needing IPv4 prefixes, it needs a tool to do it. I supposed that maintaining IPv4 routing was the easiest way to do it. If you have a better alternative, what would it be? As said to Med, if I misunderstood Jacni's idea, this debate can be closed. Cheers, RD _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list Softwires@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
