Dear Tom,

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Tom Taylor <[email protected]>wrote:

> I figured it was time to pick on someone else, so I reviewed
> draft-cui-softwire-b4-**translated-ds-lite. I found it really easy to
> understand, and all I found to change was a couple of typos.
>
> Of course, one reason lw4o6 easier to read than MAP is because it does not
> describe a port mapping algorithm. The other reason is because the MAP
> document has to describe the EA bits and their use. But that's a
> fundamental difference between the two approaches, and I can't see much
> chance to simplify MAP. The only possibility is to change the provisioning
> approach to provision the Rule IPv6 prefix, the complete shared IPv4
> address, and the PSID explicitly, then describe how to construct the MAP
> endpoint IPv6 address.
>
[Qiong] Right. You have just pointed out some essential differences between
MAP and lw4o6.

Actually, the major difference is not to use an algorithm or not . Even for
DS-Lite and NAT444, most vendors have already implemented some kind of
algorithm in AFTR to map between IPv6 address pool, IPv4 address pool and
port-set. The key here is whether to import these algorithm parameters
EXPLICITLY into IPv6 address or not. Lw4o6 does not import anything into
IPv6 address. The AFTR can/or can not implement an algorithm for mapping
between IPv6 address pool, IPv4 address pool and port-set, which is only an
implementation choice. But it can truely gain more flexibility for
operators to use/define freely of their own IPv6 address, and you can also
achieve very good features like scalibility, no-NAT in AFTR, reduced syslog
messages, etc.

Besides, I have to say again that this solution is quite simple. Before the
demo in IETF85, most vendors only took 3~4 weeks to understand, design, and
finish implementing the whole functionalities. For operators, we also find
it very simple to run it, just configuring your available IPv6 address
pools, IPv4 address pools and port-set quota is enough.

That's why we like it, and hope it will be helpful for more people.

Best wishes
Qiong


>
> Getting back to draft-cui-softwire-b4-**translated-ds-lite, I'd say it's
> ready to be adopted.
>
> Tom Taylor
> ______________________________**_________________
> Softwires mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/softwires<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>
>



-- 
==============================================
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

Reply via email to