Le 2012-03-29 à 17:56, Ole Trøan a écrit : > Remi, > >> One of your slides mentions a difference between MAP and 4rd-U concerning >> Reassembly caching. >> Could you clarify what is the issue? > > purely that 4rd-U includes text on it, and the latest MAP draft hasn't > adopted that (yet).
I didn't guess it because: - the word cache doesn't appear in our draft - it is rather the fact that NO reassembly cache is needed that is a recommended feature of 4rd-U (specified with a SHOULD). Functionally, it means BR's ability to forward fragmented packets without reassembling them, even if sent to shared-address CEs. Thanks, RD > > cheers, > Ole _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
