Masataka-san, Please see in line.
Le 2012-02-21 à 03:55, MAWATARI Masataka a écrit : ... > As all really know, 464XLAT remove 4rd and MAP, and vice versa, I > also really think. I don't understand this sentence because what 464XLAT introduces is (in 4rd/MAP) vocabulary, a variant of stateless CE (one that only works wit stateful BRs whereas those of 4rd/MAP permit BRs to also be stateless). Isn't it natural to quickly look whether IETF-specified stateless CEs can work indifferently with stateful and stateless BRs? AFAIK, there is little to add to 4rd-U so that its CEs can work according to the generic 464XLAT scenario. - I plan to work on it in Softwire. - Would be available to share views on the proposed solution? > What I really want to realize is faster deploying IPv6 network and > IPv6 service on the internet. Same objective (that was that of 6rd, and is also that of 4rd) Kind regards, RD _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
