Oh, it certainly is (per the IETF IPR rules). Thanks for the clarity, Chuck.
Cheers, Rajiv -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Anderson <[email protected]> Date: Monday, April 8, 2013 3:18 PM To: Rajiv Asati <[email protected]> Cc: Christopher Morrow <[email protected]>, nanog list <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN >I think he means patent encumbered. > >On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 07:13:11PM +0000, Rajiv Asati (rajiva) wrote: >> Chris, >> >> UmmmŠ you mean the IPv6 and IPv4 inter-dependency when you say IP >> encumbered? >> >> If so, the answer is Yes. v6 addressing doesn't need to change to >> accommodate this IPv4 A+P encoding. >> >> >> Cheers, >> Rajiv >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Christopher Morrow <[email protected]> >> Date: Monday, April 8, 2013 2:28 PM >> To: Rajiv Asati <[email protected]> >> Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson <[email protected]>, nanog list <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN >> >> > >> >On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Rajiv Asati (rajiva) >> ><[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >Yes, MAP (T-Translation or E-Encap mode) is implemented on two regular >> >routers that I know of - ASR9K and ASR1K. Without that, you are right >>that >> >MAP wouldn't have been as beneficial as claimed. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >glad it's cross platform... is it also IP encumbered so it'll remain >>just >> >as 'cross platform' ?
