> -----Original Message----- > From: Rémi Després [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 5:14 AM > To: Softwires-wg > Cc: Dan Wing; Teemu Savolainen; Satoru Matsushima; IETF discussion > list; Behave WG > Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] ... Dual Stack Hosts Using "Bump-in-the-Host" > (BIH)) > > Hi all, > > Le 27 sept. 2011 à 21:10, Dan Wing a écrit : > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > ... > >> I mean does existing > >> applications work better if double translation is done in > deterministic > >> manner? > > > > Yes, it allows the CPE to implement an ALG -- if an application needs > > an ALG (e.g., active-mode FTP). > > +1 > > As Softwire is concerned, it is worth noting here that, with > encapsulation rather than double translation, NO ALG is ever needed. > (Neither in ISP Border Relay nodes, nor in CPEs, nor in BIH hosts).
Do a message flow for active mode FTP with 4rd. I did one, and it needs an ALG in the 4rd NAPT44 function. -d > It is sometimes argued that double translation could be as simple than > encapsulation. > AFAIK, this discussion clearly indicates the contrary. > (No ALGs eliminates any variants about where to put them.) > > RD _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
