Woj, I don't think map is more optimized than lw4over6 when IPv4 and IPv6 are totally decoupled (which is lw4over6 designed to deal with). I would prefer to follow Ole's suggestion at this point, i.e. remove this text.
Best Regards, Qi On 2014-3-3, at 下午1:47, Wojciech Dec wrote: > > Current text in Section 1 reads: > > Lightweight 4over6 provides a solution for a hub-and-spoke softwire > architecture only. It does not offer direct, meshed IPv4 > connectivity between subscribers without packets traversing the AFTR. > If this type of meshed interconnectivity is required, > [I-D.ietf-softwire-map] provides a suitable solution. > > Propose changing the above to: > > Lightweight 4over6 provides a solution for a hub-and-spoke softwire > architecture only, > where the AFTR maintains (softwire) state for each subscriber. A means for > optmizing the amount of such state, as well as the option of meshed IPv4 > > connectivity between subscribers, are features of the [I-D.ietf-softwire-map] > solution. > > > Cheers, > Wojciech. > > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
