Hi Ole, Thanks for your comments. The paragraph meets the requirement of this draft.
This draft is to provide advices to MAP, lw4o6, and any other potential mechanisms. Do you think it would be helpful, or the description in MAP-E draft is enough? Best Regards, Cong 2014-02-18 17:19 GMT+08:00 Ole Troan <[email protected]>: > >> We submitted a new draft about an issue on IPv4 communication between > >> two Softwire CEs with the same IPv4 addr and different port set. > >> Any comments are appreciate. > > the MAP draft already has: > > The MAP architecture described here restricts the use of the shared > IPv4 address to only be used as the global address (outside) of the > NAPT [RFC2663] running on the CE. A shared IPv4 address MUST NOT be > used to identify an interface. While it is theoretically possible to > make host stacks and applications port-aware, it would be a drastic > change to the IP model [RFC6250]. > > cheers, > Ole > > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > >
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
