Re-,
+1,
IMHO it's unacceptable in practice.
Cheers,
Jacni
On 2/9/2012 2:39 AM, Lee, Yiu wrote:
Hi Remi,
I know this is possible to do, in theory. However my question is more
toward manageability of the network. IMHO, layering one tunnel (or
translation) protocol on another tunnel protocol is asking for trouble.
Cheers,
/Yiu
On 2/8/12 2:13 AM, "Rémi Després"<[email protected]> wrote:
6rd can be deployed over Net-10 networks (RFC1918) to deployIPv6.
Shared public IPv4 addresses can then be offered to customers via this
IPv6.
Such a use case, based on the header-mappiong variant of 4rd-U rather
than on a double MAP encapsulation, is described in
tools.ietf.org/html/draft-despres-softwire-4rd-u-03#section-5.4.
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
