ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IETF Last Call conclusion for draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis-08

2017-03-30 06:07:18
The issue is the encap/decap pair - like an old circuit model.

Do we add the encap/decap function into a Domain doing native SRv6 and the 
complexity of choosing which to use - into all the vm's?  Or do we extend the 
new SRv6 domain to the legacy infrastructure.   If we do this, there is no 
tunnel.  There is no encap/decap pair - you need to proxy for the legacy 
gear/services.

John

On Mar 30, 2017, at 4:38 AM, Mark Townsley <mark(_at_)townsley(_dot_)net> 
wrote:



On Mar 30, 2017, at 12:09 AM, Tim Chown 
<tjc(_at_)ecs(_dot_)soton(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk> wrote:

Understood, but why do you require direct insertion rather than using encap 
as per 2460bis?

The same reason we have MAP-T and 464xlat. 

- Mark


Tim


John Leddy
Comcast










<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>