On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 7:16 AM, Rémi Després <[email protected]>wrote:
> 2013-02-28 15:34, Qiong <[email protected]> : > > ... > 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. > > > Thanks to Qiong for raising this question in a more general context than > that of MAP-E issue # 18 ( > http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/softwire/trac/ticket/18) > > AFAIK, Alain's intention before he left was to move from MAP-E/MAP-T/4rd-U > to 4rd-E/4rd-T/4rd-H (with H for Hybrid). IMHO, this does make sense > because: > - "IPv4 Residual Deployment" better reflects the solution scope than > "Address and Port Mapping". > - This nicely conveys that there is commonality with 6rd. > > The fact that "MAP" has been used for some time for both MAP-E and MAP-T > can be considered an impediment, but: > - Now is a good time for making a consistent choice for the future. > - Editorial updates for this are essentially trivial. > NB: The original acronym for MAP-E was 4rd (and that of MAP-T was 4via6). > > This is my 2-cents contribution on this naming issue (after so many > contributions to build and improve the solution). > > I support this. I had the same problem in my multicast draft. I think that using a unifying name like 4rd would be helpful. Behcet
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
