Edward,

MAP-T (RFC7599) and MAP-E (RFC7577) also address the issues you describe.  Both 
CE MAP variants can be enabled in OpenWRT and can be provisioned manually or 
through DHCPv6 (RFC7598).  Another excellent manual provisioned implementation 
is at http://enog.jp/~masakazu/vyatta/map/.  There are several commercial  CE 
and BR implementations in the pipeline for MAP-T.  

-Jordan

-----Original Message-----
From: Softwires [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Edward Lopez
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 6:29 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Softwires] DS-Lite vs. 4rd

I apologize if this has been thrashed out in the past.  In looking as 
implementing DS-Lite support, it appears that the need to include an additional 
tuple of information on the IPv6 B4 address of the CPE is cumbersome to NAT 
performance and tunnel capacitance, as many HW accelerated NAT engines exist 
without this extra tuple.  It would appear that by splitting the AFTR into two 
functions, 4in6 encapsulation & NAT(CGN), we can overcome scaling and 
performance issues of DS-Lite.

However, the issue of overlapping endpoint subnets supported internally by the 
CPE leads to the issue potentially supporting NAT44 on the CPE, to support 
stateless encapsulation of returning IPv4 packets into IPv6 by the AFTR.  
Section 4.2 of RFC-6333 states that CPE devices ‘should not’ perform NAT44, but 
that’s not the same as a ‘must not’

But as you craft this solution out, you begin to realize that you are 
re-creating the majority of 4rd, RFC-7600.  However, 4rd is currently an 
experimental standard.

My questions:

-       Has anyone implemented or considered implementing DS-Lite with CPEs 
performing NAT44?
-       Are their plans for this WG to move 4rd into standards track?
-       Are their any known implementations of 4rd out there for CPE devices 
(like OpenWRT)?

Thanks!
Ed Lopez
***  Please note that this message and any attachments may contain confidential 
and proprietary material and information and are intended only for the use of 
the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are 
hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution 
or copying of this message and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender and 
destroy this e-mail and any attachments and all copies, whether electronic or 
printed.
Please also note that any views, opinions, conclusions or commitments expressed 
in this message are those of the individual sender and do not necessarily 
reflect the views of Fortinet, Inc., its affiliates, and emails are not binding 
on Fortinet and only a writing manually signed by Fortinet's General Counsel 
can be a binding commitment of Fortinet to Fortinet's customers or partners. 
Thank you. ** _______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to