On 6 March 2014 15:41, Lee, Yiu <[email protected]> wrote: > I still have problem to include text to compare two methods. Why not > remove the whole sentence as Ole stated in his email? >
You appear not to have had a problem with the current text. What is the problem with the new one? Also note that MAP-E would get also a suitable pointer to the lw46 draft concerning the 1:1 mode. > Yiu > > From: Ian Farrer <[email protected]> > Date: Thursday, March 6, 2014 at 11:27 AM > To: Wojciech Dec <[email protected]> > Cc: Softwires-wg WG <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [Softwires] I-D Action: draft-ietf-softwire-lw4over6-06.txt > > Here’s the text that Woj mentioned: > > "Lightweight 4over6 provides a solution for a hub-and-spoke softwire > architecture only, where the lwAFTR maintains (softwire) state for each > subscriber. [I-D.ietf-softwire-map] offers a means for optimizing the > amount of such state by using algorithmic IPv4 to IPv6 address mappings > to create aggregate rules. This also gives the option of direct meshed > IPv4 connectivity between subscribers." > > My position on this is that I am fine with the text above, I’m happy with > a wordsmithed version that is mutually agreeable and I am also fine with > the text being removed altogether. > > Whichever one can get us past this point is the right answer. > > Ian > > On 6 Mar 2014, at 10:28, Wojciech Dec <[email protected]> wrote: > > Qi, > > > On 5 March 2014 17:17, Qi Sun <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> 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. >> > > The point is that such state optimization is possible, using v4-v6 address > mapping, which is a characteristic of MAP and mesh mode which the current > text refers to is its by product. > > We have with Ian a new adequate sentence which fixes things, and I'll let > Ian post it. It is important to have such text for at least the following > reason: > The solutions have much in common; utilize the same MAP PSID algorithm > (although with different defaults), encap, etc. They're not thus > orthogonal, and while some may wish to implement them independently, which > is possible there is enough commonality to warrant to "pointer text". > > A side note > In both lw4over6 and MAP the IPv4 address+PSID are embedded in the IPv6 > address of a CE. So your statement of "totally decoupled" isn't quite > accurate. > > Cheers, > Wojciech. > > >> >> 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 >> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-lw4over6-07#ref-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 >> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-lw4over6-07#ref-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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > >
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
