Greetings Cameron-san,

* On Sat, 29 Oct 2011 20:06:18 +0900
* MAWATARI Masataka <[email protected]> wrote:

> Greetings Cameron-san,
> 
> 
> Cross posting to behave.
> 
> Thank you very much for your comment and sorry for the delay.
> 
> 
> n900ipv6 is interesting. Thank you for good information.
> 
> The CLAT necessary for function is simple and easy to implement
> so the range of application of CLAT can be expanded.
> 
> I agree that 464xlat is applied to mobile network too.
> I think that it can utilize a simplicity of implementation on CLAT
> and adding a usecase of the mobile network to this draft is possible.
> 
> 
> You mentioned that this method in this draft don't require DHCPv6.
> I agree with you. But I think that there are other proposals must not
> use DHCPv6. please let me know about your mention about this point.


I'm sorry... I made a mistake.
I meant to say "I think that there are other proposals don't require
DHCPv6".


Kind Regards,
Masataka MAWATARI


> * On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 13:21:51 -0700
> * Cameron Byrne <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > I like the ideas in this draft.  A few comments:
> > 
> > 1. I think this idea of NAT464 is very applicable, especially in
> > mobile networks.  There is already a similar NAT464 deployment here
> > https://code.google.com/p/n900ipv6/wiki/README ....Running code,
> > running architecture, running network are all proven today...   I
> > think it makes sense to think of the CLAT as a mobile phone, or at
> > least consider it as a use case.
> > 
> > 2. If we can consider the mobile network use case, it may make sense
> > to broaden the scope to not exclude DNS64 and not require DHCPv6.
> > Mobile networks do not generally use DHCPv6. My ideal case would be to
> > allow DNS64 to facilitate as much native and single translation
> > traffic as possible, while minimizing and enabling the double
> > translation traffic where it is needed (IPv4 sockets, IPv4 literals,
> > ...).
> > 
> > 3.  Since DHCPv6 is not used in mobile, it may make sense to add a
> > scenario to learn the NSP PREF64 of the NAT64/DNS64 from this work
> > draft-ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic-03
> > 
> > 4.  So, adding a mobile scenario would be to have CLAT in the phone,
> > DNS64 and NAT64 in the network, and CLAT does
> > draft-ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic-03 to discover NSP.  I
> > believe this solves an important problem for mobile phone and mobile
> > networks that must go IPv6-only.  Today, NAT64/DNS64 on mobile phones
> > work well, but there is a small minority of applications that cannot
> > work, and this N900 code i showed above has proven to overcome these
> > limitations.  I believe this draft can provide a generic frame work
> > for mobile as well as fixed-line that works well if we slightly
> > increase the scope as mentioned above.
> > 
> > 5.  Finally, i think this work should be moved to BEHAVE.  AFAIK,
> > BEHAVE is not closed and BEHAVE is the right space for this
> > architectural work that uses the BEHAVE standards.
> > 
> > Cameron

-- 
Japan Internet Exchange
MAWATARI Masataka <[email protected]>
tel:+81-3-3243-9579

_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to