+1. 4rd-u is tweaking IPv6 header such as fragment header, hop limit, V-octet, etc to create a unified transport instead of the encapsulation (MAP-E) and the translation (MAP-T). MAP-E and MAP-T do not intend to create a new transport. In fact, MAP-E utilizes rfc2473 and MAP-T utilizes rfc6145. We implemented the mapping rule with the standard transport. So, from my point of view, since 4rd-u focus on defining a new transport, the discussion point of 4rd is a little bit different from MAP-E/MAP-T. Also, the following idea is a good way to get the consensus widely to define the new transport instead of the existing tunneling/translation.
Thanks, Tetsuya Murakami On 2012/04/01, at 11:02, Satoru Matsushima wrote: After the meeting, I've figured out that 4rd-u define new type of transport, since it adds several new semantics in its packet format with V-octet as a helper of packet format distinguisher. That kind of work is of course out of scope of Softwire working group. I therefore suggest to the 4rd-u authors that a new BOF or a working group which named like 'unified packet format for tunneling'. Best regards, --satoru On 2012/04/01, at 16:38, Jan Zorz @ go6.si wrote: On 3/31/12 4:56 PM, Rémi Després wrote: Alain, You had initially announced that either one specification would be chosen for standard track (among T, E, and U), or specifications would all become WG drafts on the experimental track ((*) below). In Paris: (a)The MAP proposal became presented as an inseparable T+E package. (b) The WG couldn't make a consensus choice between T+E or U. Now publishing both MAP-T+E and 4rd-U as WG documents on the experimental track, is therefore consistent with what was announced (and was also asked for by several at the end of the meeting). As you explained, this won't prevent from selecting one for standard track later on, based on better market experience. Not sure that was the outcome - as I understood Alain, we'll make a decision here on mailinglist in a very short period of time. Cheers, Jan _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
