Hi Remi, What more, given that 4rd-U needs to be combined with BIH, the claim of it offering some "unified" solution, different operationally from MAP is bogus. If anything this combination and the fact that there is a IPv6.1 being created actually makes 4rd-u operations a major challenge in comparison to what we know of as IPinIP tunnelling or NAT64 with MAP.
The need for an IPv6 6.1 is AFAIK an invention of yours, not something needed by 4rd-U. 4rd-u does change the basic semantics of fields in IPv6, ??? (If you would have evidence that everything isn't backward compatible, please share this information.) For example, the existing implementation for processing the fragment header is not working on your definition of the fragment header. MAP-E/T does not require any change of existing process of IPv6 header. Thanks, Tetsuya Murakami
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
