Hi Satoru, 1. I don't know whether the new draft has been discussed in DT, but has it achieved consensus within the DT? what's more, this draft hasn't got the consensus in the softwires WG where the mdt-map-03 draft was adopted as WG draft before it was submitted. l'm wondering how this draft-XX-softwire-mapping-address-and-port-04 got adopted as a WG draft.
2. From the draft, I can feel that this mode is NOT the kind with other rules. it is stated separately with others unnaturally. 3. AFAIK, stateless solutions are featured with decouple of IPv4 and ipv6 addredssing, which leads to no states kept on the carrier side. once you abandon the feature using so called 1:1 mode which has to maitain state (no matter how you try to hide the fact), MAP will become neither total stateless nor stateful. this does no good to promote MAP for further development. BRs! Qi Sun On 6/24/12, Satoru Matsushima <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Qiong, > > I'm disagree with your opinion. > > 1. Recent changes in draft-ietf-softwire-map-00 has been discussed in the > DT. > 2. MAP just covers so called '1:1 mode' with most granular mapping rule for > CEs provisioning, which is as one of its characteristics. > 3. The motivation draft does not restrict that as you stated, just > 'assumed', it's neither 'MUST' nor 'SHOULD'. > > Best regards, > --satoru > > > On 2012/06/24, at 14:35, Qiong wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> As we all know, once an individual draft is adopted as a WG draft, it is >> owned by the whole WG, rather than just the editors. Just as Remi said, >> the normal procedure to follow is to reach WG consensus _before_ posting a >> newly edited version. >> >> From draft-mdt-softwire-mapping-address-and-port-03 to >> draft-ietf-softwire-map-00, there are several changes between them. In >> particular, the newly introduced "1:1 mode", which decouples IPv4 and IPv6 >> addressing, has never been discussed openly in the WG mailing list, or >> even in the MAP design team either. >> >> Actually, this "1:1 mode" is against the stateless-4v6-motivation draft. >> The motivation draft has clearly defines the "Stateless 4/6 solution" as >> follows: >> >> Stateless 4/6 solution denotes a solution which does not require any >> per-user state (see Section 2.3 of [RFC1958]) to be maintained by any IP >> address sharing function in the Service Provider's network. This category >> of solutions assumes a dependency between an IPv6 prefix and IPv4 >> address. >> >> AFAIK what the WG has adopted MAP related draft is >> draft-mdt-softwire-mapping-address-and-port-03, NOT >> draft-ietf-softwire-map-00. And the stateless solution should “response to >> the solution motivation document” according to the Softwire charter. That >> means draft-ietf-softwire-map-00 IS NOT QUALIFIED to be a WG draft. >> >> We can all recall that our softwire WG has worked on stateless solutions >> for more than one and a half years, and we have achieved a lot of work >> which has been documented in charter, stateless motivation, 4rd-varients, >> MAP-03, etc. AFAIK all the authors have kept the basic "stateless" >> principle and the MAP design team is also working on it together to find a >> better algorithm, address format, etc. So it is really not appropriate to >> make such changes when MAP is adopted as a WG item in such a short time. >> >> From this perspective, draft-ietf-softwire-map-00 can only be regarded as >> draft-XX-softwire-mapping-address-and-port-04. It is not even the output >> of MAP design team. >> >> Best wishes >> >> ============================================== >> Qiong Sun >> China Telecom Beijing Research Institude >> >> >> Open source code: >> lightweight 4over6: http://sourceforge.net/projects/laft6/ >> PCP-natcoord: http://sourceforge.net/projects/pcpportsetdemo/ >> =============================================== >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Softwires mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
