On Oct 31, 2011 2:25 AM, "Rémi Després" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Masataka-san,
>
> 1.
> Thank you for sharing your interesting experience with the JPIX trial
service based on 464XLAT.
> Could you, for clarification, describe in more details formats of XLAT
prefixes in this trial?
>
> 2.
> Objectives of 464XLAT and 4rd-U look very similar (ref
draft-despres-softwire-4rd-u-01).
>
> Indeed:
> - Both use "DHCPv6 prefix delegation or another method" to inform
CLAT/CEs of their IPv6 prefixes.
> - Both "can implement traffic engineering based on IPv4 source address
and IPv4 destination address" (a feature that, as noted in your draft, is
missing in encapsulation).
>
> OTOH, unless I miss something, 464XLAT doesn't provide incoming
connectivity of CLATs in case of shared IPv4 addresses (while 4rd-U does
provide it to CEs). In this respect 4rd-U seems functionally more complete.
>
> Thoughts?
>

The difference, imho, is stateful vs stateless.

Many operators like myself do not have enough ipv4 addresses to
incrementally grow with a stateless solution. It is not possible to
renumber the existing network and flash everyone into a stateless solution,
so I require a more scalable solution ...starting with very few address.

Also, given the very small amount of existing ipv4, the per port
allocations of a stateless solution are not acceptable for me.  Others may
have different starting positions therefore may find stateless helpful.

Cb
>
> Regards,
> RD
>
>
>
>
> Le 27 oct. 2011 à 07:44, MAWATARI Masataka a écrit :
>
> > Greetings Alain-san,
> >
> >
> > Please let me make a presentation at IETF 82 Meeting.
> > I would like to introduce the following draft as a v4->v6->v4
> > translation experience in softwire working group.
> >
> > ---
> > Topic: "464XLAT: Combination of Stateful and Stateless Translation"
> > Draft name: draft-mawatari-softwire-464xlat-01
> > Time needed: 5-10minutes
> > Presenter's name: Masataka Mawatari
> > ---
> >
> > This is a simple technique to provide IPv4 access service across
> > IPv6 network just by using twice IPv4/IPv6 translation standardized
> > in [RFC6145] and [RFC6146].
> >
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mawatari-softwire-464xlat
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Masataka MAWATARI
> >
> >
> > * On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:22:04 +0200
> > * Remi Despres <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Alain,
> >>
> >> Can you please schedule a time slot for a 4rd-U presentation:
> >>
> >> Title        : A Unified stateless solution for IPv4 residual
Deployments (4rd-U)
> >> Document: draft-despres-softwire-4rd-u-01
> >> Duration: 20 min (incl questions, expected to be numerous)
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >> RD
> >
> > --
> > Japan Internet Exchange
> > MAWATARI Masataka <[email protected]>
> > tel:+81-3-3243-9579
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Softwires mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
> _______________________________________________
> 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