Hi all, According to the discussion last Friday, there should be some text describing the characteristics of lw4o6 and map-e with cross-referece, and the text should be the same (or almost the same).
The two points that are requested to be in the text: * MAP-E achieves aggregated rules * MAP-E does mesh Here is the proposal: In lw4o6 draft, section of Introduction: Lightweight 4over6 provides a solution with complete independence of IPv4 and IPv6 addressing (i.e., the IPv6 prefix does not embed an IPv4 address and/or port set). This is accomplished by maintaining state for each softwire (per-subscriber state) in the lwAFTR and using a hub-and-spoke architecture whereby all traffic traverse the lwAFTR. [I-D.ietf-softwire- map] offers a means for reducing 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. In MAP-E draft, section of Introduction: MAP-E offers a means for reducing the amount state held in the BR by using algorithmic IPv4 to IPv6 address mappings to create aggregate rules. This also gives the option of direct, meshed IPv4 connectivity between subscribers. Lightweight 4over6 [I-D.ietf-softwire-lw4over6] provides a solution with complete independence of IPv4 and IPv6 addressing (i.e., the IPv6 prefix does not embed an IPv4 address and/or port set). This is accomplished by maintaining state for each softwire (per-subscriber state) in the lwAFTR and using a hub-and-spoke architecture whereby all traffic traverse the lwAFTR. The above text has been agreed by the lw4over6 co-authors. @Woj, could you please see if the the proposal resolves your concern? Thanks! Best Regards, Qi
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
