2013-02-17  03:03, Qiong <[email protected]> :
...
> It is my opinion that we've discussed this 1:1 mode many many times
> before, and at each time concluded that a) it is a natural characteristic
> of MAP ii) it would actually require *more text* (and complexity) to
> remove it.
> 
> Sorry I can hardly find such conclusion.

+1

> 1) In the current text, the PSID option is only used in this 1:1 mode which 
> will have impact on both DHCPv6 server and CPE.

Existence in MAP of a DHCPv6 option whose only purpose is 1:1 is a PROOF that, 
contrary to a superficial belief, 1:1 isn't a "natural characteristic" of MAP.

 
> 2) From the testing draft, there is a dedicated parameter "-X" to indicate no 
> embedding EA-bits in IPv6 prefix which is not used in normal MAP-E/MAP-T. 
> So for me, it is hard to say this 1:1 mode is a natural characteristic of MAP.

> Long long time ago, we spent two days in Beijing Interim meeting to discuss 
> what need to be covered in MAP, what's the motivation and requirement of each 
> functional element, including Encapsulation, Translation, Hub&Sope and Mesh. 
> That comes to be the draft-ietf-softwire-map-00. But now, 1:1 mode was just 
> simply added without any discussion about the motivation, requirement in the 
> working group, and not covered in stateless motivation draft either.

Accurate summary of what happened.

I hope the editor will accept to remain neutral, and have in the draft intended 
for WG last call nothing more than conclusions reached in the WG s a whole.

Regards,
RD


> It did raise confusion of why this is needed in MAP (two address sharing 
> mechanisms in one solution), and how it should be used. So I suggest to reach 
> consensus on motivation and requirement text first before processing 1:1 mode 
> in MAP. 
> 
> For MAP-base draft, I do think removing 1:1 mode would help MAP to be a more 
> cleaner stateless solution and easy understanding.
> 
> Best wishes
> Qiong
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Softwires mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to