Subject: [Softwires] I-D Action: draft-ietf-softwire-map-dhcp-03.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 02:17:05 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the Softwires Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : DHCPv6 Options for Mapping of Address and Port
	Author(s)       : Tomasz Mrugalski
                          Ole Troan
                          Wojciech Dec
                          Congxiao Bao
                          Leaf Y. Yeh
                          Xiaohong Deng
	Filename        : draft-ietf-softwire-map-dhcp-03.txt
	Pages           : 20
	Date            : 2013-02-25

Abstract:
   This document specifies DHCPv6 options for the provisioning of
   Mapping of Address and Port (MAP) Customer Edge (CE) devices, based
   on the MAP paramaters defined in [I-D.ietf-softwire-map].

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-softwire-map-dhcp

There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-map-dhcp-03

A diff from the previous version is available at:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-softwire-map-dhcp-03

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Tomek Mrugalski <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:36:39 +0100

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-softwire-map-dhcp
Dear group,

This is an minor update to the map-dhcp draft. This time we made couple
small editorial changes in examples (we hope the examples are now easier
to read), updated authors affiliations, cleaned up references and fixed
issues reported by idnits.

Cheers,
Tomek

---

From: Rémi Després <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 12:22:07 +0100

Hello, Tomek,

Two comments related to recent discussions:

1. The PSID-len parameter of section 4.5 MUST NOT be used in BMRs that apply to several CEs (the general case in stateless use of MAP). If 1:1 mapping must be covered by MAP (next point), this  should be noted in the text.

2. Whether MAP must include specific parameters to support 1:1 mappings (namely PSID-len and PSID) doesn't seem to have reached consensus. As a minimum this justifies at this stage an editor's note (IMHO).

Regards,
RD

Le 2013-02-25 à 11:36, Tomek Mrugalski <[email-masked]> a écrit :

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