Subject: [Softwires] comments on draft-lee-softwire-6rd-udp-02

From: WashamFan <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 15:52:17 +0800

Hi,

Personally, I support the motivation of the draft. The draft
says HGW is unable to be modified in some cases. My situation
is worse than that. My ISP already assigned me 10/8 address
because of the pressure of IPv4 exhaustion, I guess.

For section 7, I think there is one issue missed. IPv6 communication
between 6rd UDP hosts would be hairpined via 6rd BR. That
should be different from classic 6rd.

I'd like to know the status of the draft, is the WG pursuing this
work?

Thanks,
washam

---

From: "Yiu L. Lee" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 08:45:53 -0400

Hi Washam,

I am glad to hear that there are interests for this draft. In last IETF
meeting, the WG didn't reach any content whether the WG should spend any
effort to work on this problem. Some people believed the existing L2TPv2
softwire could solve this problem. We argued that deploying L2TPv2 was heavy
and could be expensive. However, we didn't have as many responses from the
floor as we wanted. In short, no consent was reached.

Yiu

On 9/27/10 3:52 AM, "WashamFan" <[email-masked]> wrote:

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