Hi Ian , > - I-D.bfmk-softwire-unified-cpe is currently included as a normative > reference, this will be moved to informative.
Does this mean the Unified CPE will be referenced as an informative one? Best Regards, Qi On 2013-7-11, at δΈε2:46, <[email protected]> <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm currently updating the lw4o6 draft in advance of IETF87. I plan to > include the following changes: > > - I-D.bfmk-softwire-unified-cpe needs to be changed to > I-D.ietf-softwire-unified-cpe throughout > > - Section 7 β the reference from I-D.ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-ipv6 should be > changed to draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6 in line with the DHC > recommendations > > - Section 5.2 does not consider what happens if a packet is received by the > lwB4 that isn't addressed to the correct destination v4 address with a valid > l4 port (there's a small discussion about this for MAP-E on the list at the > moment). Propose that the lw4o6 draft is updated in line with the outcome of > this discussions so that MAP-E & lw4o6 CPE behaviour stays aligned. > > - I-D.bfmk-softwire-unified-cpe is currently included as a normative > reference, this will be moved to informative. > > - Add text to section 5.2 saying that any IPv4 fragments received by the lwB4 > (CPE) after decapsulation are re-assembled before NAT, so that the whole > packet can be translated. This is based on some problems encountered during > interop testing. > > If you have any comments or objections to the above, please let me know. > > Cheers, > Ian > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
