Re-, Thanks for the explanations.
I suggest the document to be updated to reflect the clarifications you provided and also the ones provided by Ian and Ted for MAP and Lw4over6 cases. These are important inputs. I withdraw my objection to his document. Thank you all for your patient explanations. Cheers, Med >-----Message d'origine----- >De : Qi Sun [mailto:[email protected]] >Envoyé : lundi 15 avril 2013 17:47 >À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN >Cc : [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; >[email protected] >Objet : Re: [dhcwg] [Softwires] Adoption call on draft-scskf-dhc-dhcpv4- >over-dhcpv6 > > >Dear Med, > >In MAP-E pure stateless mode, IPv4 address (prefix) and port set are >provisioned in MAP Rules as designed. But in MAP-E 1:1 mode and lw4over6 >which are (kind of) stateful, it has to take into considerations about the >lease time etc. issues. In this case, IMHO, DHCPv4 over DHCPv6 is more >suitable for IPv4 related configurations. > >What's more, DHCPv4-over-DHCPv6 is not only designed to deal with the >option issues, but also to handle other architectural problems in >transition (as Bernie mentioned in previous mail). So I think DHCPv4-over- >DHCPv6 is helpful for the evolvement in DHCP architecture. > > >Best Regards, >Qi Sun > > >On 2013-4-15, at 下午11:13, <[email protected]> ><[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Ian, >> >> Thanks for the clarification. >> I understood from your answer: dhcpv6 will be used for both MAP and >lw4over6 and both don't require draft-scskf-* for IP address + port >provisioning. >> >> Given currently no additional dhcpv4 only options is required for any of >the solutions we are discussing in softwire, I do still think it is not >justified to take on a solution for a problem which may not exist. >> >> draft-scskf-* proposal can be revived when there is a real need to >support dhcpv4-only options. No? >> >> Cheers, >> Med >> >>> -----Message d'origine----- >>> De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Envoyé : lundi 15 avril 2013 16:56 >>> À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN; [email protected] >>> Cc : [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] >>> Objet : Re: [Softwires] [dhcwg] Adoption call on draft-scskf-dhc-dhcpv4- >>> over-dhcpv6 >>> >>> Hi Med, >>> >>> It would still work for lw-4o6 and the unified CPE. All of the basic >>> params for configuring lw4o6/MAP1:1 can be provisioned through the >>> OPTION_MAP_BIND that is proposed in the unified CPE draft over DHCPv6. >>> Additional DHCPv4 only options would be done via the DHCPv4oDHCPv6 >method >>> for both lw4o6 and MAP-E. >>> >>> We still need to agree on which option will be used for provisioning the >>> address of the lwAFTR/MAP BR, however. There was some discussion on this >>> on the SW ML last week, but no conclusion reached. >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Ian >>> >>> On 15/04/2013 16:47, "[email protected]" >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Re-, >>>> >>>> Thanks for clarifying Ted. I must admit this is not what I understood >>>> when I read draft-scskf-*. >>>> >>>> Does the same conclusion applies also for lw-4over6? (I'm naively >>>> assuming, given the approach defined in draft-ietf-softwire-unified- >cpe, >>>> the same dhcpv6 to configure MAP will also be used lw-4over6) >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Med >>>> >>>>> -----Message d'origine----- >>>>> De : Ted Lemon [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>> Envoyé : lundi 15 avril 2013 16:39 >>>>> À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN >>>>> Cc : Qi Sun; [email protected]; Softwires ([email protected]) >>>>> Objet : Re: [dhcwg] Adoption call on draft-scskf-dhc-dhcpv4-over- >dhcpv6 >>>>> >>>>> On Apr 15, 2013, at 10:27 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Are you saying MAP is not a concerned with this draft and dhcpv6 can >be >>>>> used for MAP? >>>>> >>>>> For configuring the MAP-E prefix and port set, yes. That was the >>>>> discussion we had in Softwires in Orlando: cover the easy stuff with >>>>> DHCPv6 >>>>> (this is the existing DHCPv6 MAP option), and then if someone needs >>>>> legacy >>>>> IPv4 services or stateful address allocation, do it with DHCPv4-over- >>>>> DHCPv6. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Softwires mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dhcwg mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
