I might have a naive question: why does the Softtwire-WG need a document for deployment other than a document for motivation?
I guess the answer might be the motivation is for the requirements, and the deployment is for the specified application cases, right? But to me the answer might be as simple as that motivation is the deployment. Could it possible to merge these 2 document? Best Regards, Leaf From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Maoke Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 12:01 PM To: Wojciech Dec Cc: Softwires-wg Subject: Re: [Softwires] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-mdt-softwire-map-deployment-01.txt 2012/6/26 Wojciech Dec <[email protected]> Hi, comments: section 4.2 of the draft reads: " a MAP domain is a set of MAP CEs and BRs connected to the same virtual link. One MAP domain shares a common BR and has the same set of BMRs, FMRs and DMR, and it can be further divided into multiple sub-domains when multiple IPv4 subnets are deployed in one MAP domain. There might be multiple BMRs in one MAP domain, and CE would pick up its own BMR by longest prefix matching lookup. This effectively confirms that multiple MAP domains are an established characteristics, and logic dictates that if N CEs can be in a given domain, N can also equal 1. multiple domain is surely an established characteristics. however, the question is: can N be 1/K (K:int > 1)? ;-) We look forward to updates to the draft, also in terms of referring to the specs. thanks a lot for the comment. and updating the draft with referring to the specs is definitely the most important task but the first-priority task of us is clarifying the semantics and impacts of the specs itself. thanks and regards, maoke Regards, Woj. On 26 June 2012 08:24, Maoke <[email protected]> wrote: hi all, we have submitted the updated version of the MAP deployment draft. As the new draft of MAP spec introduces technical uncertainties and hasn't reach the consensus. we noticed that the 1:1 mode involves different way of operation, needing to carefully investigate and to understand. Currently we exclude the 1:1 mode from the scope of MAP deployment. the major change of this version in comparison to the previous version includes: - adding of the new section 4.1: Network Models taking the example of home network, explain what is the typical use cases of MAP - editorial changes and correction of grammar/wording/spellings. we are aware that this MAP deployment draft has not reviewed by the working group, and therefore we update it still as individual draft for the time being. comments and recommendations are requested. regards, maoke ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <[email protected]> Date: 2012/6/24 Subject: New Version Notification for draft-mdt-softwire-map-deployment-01.txt To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] A new version of I-D, draft-mdt-softwire-map-deployment-01.txt has been successfully submitted by Qiong Sun and posted to the IETF repository. Filename: draft-mdt-softwire-map-deployment Revision: 01 Title: Mapping of Address and Port (MAP) - Deployment Considerations Creation date: 2012-06-24 WG ID: Individual Submission Number of pages: 32 URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mdt-softwire-map-deployment-01.txt Status: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mdt-softwire-map-deployment Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mdt-softwire-map-deployment-01 Diff: http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-mdt-softwire-map-deployment-01 Abstract: This document describes when and how an operator uses the technique of Mapping of Address and Port (MAP) for the IPv4 residual deployment in the IPv6-dominant domain. The IETF Secretariat _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
