On Oct 31, 2011 6:19 AM, "Rémi Després" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Le 31 oct. 2011 à 14:09, Cameron Byrne a écrit : > >> >> 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. > > Sharing the orders of magnitude you have to face would help to appreciate this constraint (reminding that hosts that are dual-stack don't need as many IPv4 ports as others). >
I believe the draft is addressing the scenario where the host and access network are NOT dual stack due to address constraints. For my use-case, without exposing my own forecasts, you can probably google for mobile device growth to understand my growth magitude, regarding available address space ...consider it non-existent within less than 12 months... to the point that adding new stores of ipv4 address is not a feasible input to strategic planning. Imho, I simply do not believe there is any *strategic* value in stateless solutions. Yes, if we completely reinvented the service to use a scheme of stateless address sharing there may be a path, but you cannot get there from here... at least not in my case. I believe we have discussed this before. I hope my thoughts clarified your question regarding the draft. Cb >> 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. > > Same point as above. > > Regards, > RD > > > > >> 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
