hi Remi, it a little confuses me that the new version introduces 2 variants - what is the technical difference of 4rd-U encapsulation variant vs. MAP-E? (except written in a single or some separated documents)
on the other hand, it is unfair to state the benefit "Header-mapping provides more complete transparency to IPv4 packets than solutions using twice the IPv6/IPv4 translation of RFC6145" without mentioning the (at least the following two pieces of) cost: 1. losing the compatibility with single translation; 2. putting ICMPv4 PDU as the payload of IPv6 directly, with neither IP header nor ICMP header has the address checksum information - this will disable firewall preventing attacks. best regards, maoke 2012/1/29 Rémi Després <[email protected]> > Hello all, > > The new version of the proposed unified 4rd has just ben posted. > It is available at: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-despres-softwire-4rd-u-03 > > A major evolution since the previous version has been to have in it two > variants. > - The Header-mapping variant is as in the previous version > - The Encapsulation variant is added after comments received, and > accepted, that some use cases cannot be satisfied if the Header-mapping > variant is the only one. > > Compared to the alternative approach of several MAP documents, the > single-document approach is expected to avoid duplicate specifications, and > to facilitate consistency checks of the design. > Besides: > - Header-mapping provides more complete transparency to IPv4 packets than > solutions using twice the IPv6/IPv4 translation of RFC6145. > - It has also the advantage of a simpler and self-sufficient specification. > - The algorithm which permits BRs to forward datagram fragments without > datagram reassembly is included. > - The problem of fragmented datagrams from shared address CEs that must > have different Identification if they go to common destinations is covered. > - The design re-introduces the Domain IPv6 suffix which in some earlier > 4rd designs, and somehow has been lost. > - The port-set algorithm is without parameter. > > All questions and comments will be most welcome. > > Regards, > RD > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires >
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
