As each implementation has its own, but I heard at least two implementors confirm that it is negligible difference between 15 to 63, done.
cheers, --satoru On 2013/03/13, at 17:39, Satoru Matsushima <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, I couldn't make comment during meeting but, > > On 2013/03/12, at 3:28, Ole Troan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> - Offset 4 versus 6. >> Discussion on value of wasting 3000 port versus simplicity of nibble >> alignment. >> No objection to moving default offset to 6 (from 4 in revision 04) > > Does anyone have a evaluated result of NAT performance difference in the > number of derived port range? > ie. 63 port ranges (6 bits offset) vs 15 port ranges (4 bit offset) on a CPE. > > It would be better to see the result which show it could be negligible with > the updated text. > > cheers, > --satoru _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
