Hi, I'm in favor of the MAP documents suit. I support to adopt these as WG 
documents.

cheers,
--satoru

On 2012/01/30, at 20:31, Ole Trøan wrote:

> hi,
> 
> the MAP (Mapping of address and port) design team has now written and 
> published the following sets of drafts.
> 
> the base document (port mapping algorithm):
>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mdt-softwire-mapping-address-and-port-03
>  
> http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-mdt-softwire-mapping-address-and-port-03.txt
> 
> the encapsulation document (MAP-E):
>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mdt-softwire-map-encapsulation-00
> 
> the translation document (MAP-T):
>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mdt-softwire-map-translation-00
> 
> the DHCP option (MAP-DHCP):
>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mdt-softwire-map-dhcp-option-02
> 
> there is a MAP deployment document coming soon.
> 
> the solution described in this set of documents, are written to satisfy the 
> following from the softwires charter:
>   4. Developments for stateless legacy IPv4 carried over IPv6 
>      - develop a solution motivation document to be published as an RFC 
>      - develop a protocol specification response to the solution 
>        motivation document; this work item will not be taken through 
> 
> in the design team's view, this set of documents are ready to be adopted as 
> working group documents.
> 
> comments?
> 
> for the MAP design team,
> Ole
> _______________________________________________
> Softwires mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to