Hi Dapeng, IMHO both sides are right. Whether in CPE or in the SP, there are states. I guess when people say stateless on this list, they always refer to SP network (vs. CPE). But we all agree that there would be states in the CPE for the "stateless" solutions we discuss here. If we can clarify "stateless" refers to SP network, does this work better for you?
We can argue that CPE is part of "SP" network. However, states in CPE exist since introducing NAT. This is well understood and everybody has lots of experience of it. States in SP are new to many operators and some of them prefer keeping the states in the CPE due to various reasons we discuss in the draft. That said, there are always pros and cons, it is up to the operators to decide what path they would prefer. Regards, Yiu On 2/24/12 7:21 AM, "liu dapeng" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi Med, > >Yes, I am considering CPE. There are two reasons: > >1. The definition of "stateless" should not be bind to the provider's >network. The document should define "stateless" for the Internet not >only for the operator. > >2. Even for CPE itself, in many cases, it should be considered as >provider's network since operator need to control/configure the CPE >remotely in that case. > >regards, >Dapeng Liu >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
