[...] > I briefly read into the 4rd draft, but it's not entirely clear to me > whether other solutions don't exist. Maybe there are other means to > get the context knowledge that this particular IPv6 address has a > special structure encoded somehow.
as a clarification of what has happened in softwire. (Suresh, please correct me if I'm wrong.) the softwire working group has chosen to standardize "MAP-E (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-map-02)" as the solution for stateless A+P. the two competing proposals MAP-T (dIVI) and 4rd are being published on experimental track. all of these 3 solutions use interface-ids. MAP-E a single address of a certain format. while MAP-T and 4rd uses the interface-id field to carry destination IPv4 address, and in 4rd's case a checksum neutraliser field. the interface-ids that 4rd uses must be unique on the link, and it doesn't handle conflicts with other (native) nodes well. alternative approaches to reserving interface-id space for this mechanism could be: - reserve a /64 of the customers delegated prefix for the sole use of 4rd - the 4rd node protects all possible 4rd interface-ids using DAD Best regards, Ole -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
