Hi Remi,
On Mar 17, 2009, at 5:05 AM, Rémi Després wrote:
Routing within the site is based on local addresses, e.g. ULAs.
That's only in SAM-capable CPEs and in SAM-capable hosts that, knowing
SAM parameters, global-address packets can be encapsulated in
local-address packets.
I have read the SAM draft a few times now, and I still don't really
understand what you are proposing...
I understand how communication could happen across a SAM zone when
both end nodes have global addresses. The global packet could be
encapsulated in an IP header that uses local addresses and routed
across the SAM zone. When it leaves the SAM zone, the outer header
would be removed and end-to-end transparency would be maintained. I
also understand how this might be useful in situation where, for
example,
But, I don't understand how a host that does not know its global
address can use SAM to communicate with other hosts on the global
Internet. If such a host sends from a local source address to a
global destination address, where is the local source address mapped
or translated into a global address, so that the global destination
receives a packet with a source IP address that can be used to route a
packet back to the sender?
> (3) Exactly what formulation of the end-to-end principle are you
> referring to in this paper when you indicate that SAM preserves it
in
> IPv6?
Thanks for the remark.
There should be a reference, e.g. to RFC 1958.
What is meant is IP-layer network transparency, e2e.
Addresses and ports that are seen by two communicating applications
must
be the same at both ends.
If you were to change your text to refer to end-to-end transparency
(as discussed in RFC 1958) instead of the end-to-end principle (as is
also discussed in RFC 3724) that would address my terminology concern.
Margaret
_______________________________________________
nat66 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
