Dear all, Please see inline .
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 11:35 PM, <mohamed.boucad...@orange.com> wrote: > > Please see below. > > Cheers, > Med > > > -----Message d'origine----- > > De : francis.dup...@fdupont.fr [mailto:francis.dup...@fdupont.fr] > > Envoyé : mercredi 14 mars 2012 16:13 > > À : Alain Durand > > Cc : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP; Softwires WG; > > draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite; > > draft-penno-softwire-sd...@tools.ietf.org > > Objet : Re: [Softwires] draft-penno-softwire-sdnat vs. > > draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite > > > > > > => the IPv6-Transport DHCP Relay Agent (TRA, vs, the CRA, > > IPv6-Transport > > Client Relay Agent) > > > > > o PCP[I-D.ietf-pcp-base]: an initiator can launch multiple PCP > > > requests simultaneously to acquire a number ports within the > > > same IPv4 address, > > > > => I can't see how this has a real chance to work... > > Med: The PCP case has been demoed. Please refer to > http://www.internetsociety.org/articles/new-technology-demo-pcp; in > particular you can read: > > "In the second demonstration scenario, the CPE requested several sets > of noncontiguous ports (utilizing draft-tsou-pcp-natcoord-03 and > draft-zhou-softwire-b4-nat-02). Upon receipt of the corresponding > PCP request sent by the client, the PCP server requested the CGN to > assign port forwarding and to bypass NAT on the requested port > ranges. The NAT function was performed on the CPE from this point > forward, thus reducing the NAT processing requirement on the CGN > router." > [Qiong] We also have implemented and demoed in IETF 81th. Please refer to http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite-04.txt in Appendix section. Best wishes Qiong > > > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > Softwires@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires >
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list Softwires@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
