Hi Maoke, Masakazu Asama-san, Thanks a lot for your comment! Right, we must correct it in the next version.
To WG: This new version is updated to reflect the discussion result in the last IETF meeting, covering MAP-E, MAP-T and 4rd-u. The major changes are as follows: 1) Move the difference between MAP-E, MAP-T and 4rd into one section, so hopefully the rest of the draft can be applied to these three. 2) Split references to Normative and Informative, as requested by Mark last time 3) Change the PSID consideration, as raised in the mailing list (still needs to be updated) 4) Update some references which have become RFC or WG item 5) Lots of editorial changes and cleaning Currently, the title of this draft is still MAP only, as we have not found a good term to call MAP-E, MAP-T and 4rd-u. So we would like to get advice from the working group to address this problem. Your review and comments are more than welcome. Thanks in advance ! Best wishes Qiong On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Maoke <[email protected]> wrote: > hi all, > > a text mistake is discovered (by Masakazu Asama-san, the developer of > ASAMAP MAP implementation, thanks a lot to Asama-san!). the erratum must be > included in the next revision: > > 4.2.5 PSID Consideration > ... > (para 2 reads) > The default PSID offset is chosen as 4 in [I-D.ietf-softwire-map] and > full-zero PSID is not permitted to use, which excludes the use of > port range 0~4096. Operator may adjust the value based on actual > usage, policy, and service model. > ... > > where the *full-zero PSID is not permitted to use* is incorrect. the fact > is, port range 0~4096 doesn't corresponds to the PSID = 0x000, but the > offset-bits = 0x0. i.e., no matter how much the PSID value is, the > full-zero offset-bits (the first 4 bits of port number, as default) is > excluded from using. full-zero PSID is NO problem here. > > please the co-authors, and others too, do the double-check on the > understanding. > > cheers, > maoke > > 2013/2/25 <[email protected]> > > >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> This draft is a work item of the Softwires Working Group of the IETF. >> >> Title : Mapping of Address and Port (MAP) - Deployment >> Considerations >> Author(s) : Qiong Sun >> Maoke Chen >> Gang Chen >> Tina Tsou >> Simon Perreault >> Filename : draft-ietf-softwire-map-deployment-01.txt >> Pages : 32 >> Date : 2013-02-25 >> >> 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 datatracker status page for this draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-softwire-map-deployment >> >> There's also a htmlized version available at: >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-map-deployment-01 >> >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-softwire-map-deployment-01 >> >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Softwires mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > 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
