Chris, That's an incorrect draft pointer. Here is the correct one -
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-map tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-map-t http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-map-dhcp And no, Cisco has no IPR on MAP wrt the above drafts. Cheers, Rajiv PS: Please do note that the IPRs mostly get nullified once they are through the IETF standards process. -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> Date: Monday, April 8, 2013 3:41 PM To: Rajiv Asati <raj...@cisco.com> Cc: Chuck Anderson <c...@wpi.edu>, nanog list <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN > > > >On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Rajiv Asati (rajiva) ><raj...@cisco.com> wrote: > >Oh, it certainly is (per the IETF IPR rules). > > > > > >which rfcs? I can find a draft in softwire: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mdt-softwire-map-translation-01 > > >and a reference to this in wikipedia: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_transition_mechanisms#MAP > > >which says: "...(MAP) is a Cisco IPv6 transition proposal..." > > >so.. err, we won't see this in juniper gear since: > 1) not a standard > 2) encumbered by IPR issues > > >weee! > > >Thanks for the clarity, Chuck. > >Cheers, >Rajiv > >-----Original Message----- >From: Chuck Anderson <c...@wpi.edu> >Date: Monday, April 8, 2013 3:18 PM >To: Rajiv Asati <raj...@cisco.com> > >Cc: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.li...@gmail.com>, nanog list ><nanog@nanog.org> >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, >>> >>> UmmmÅ 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 <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> >>> Date: Monday, April 8, 2013 2:28 PM >>> To: Rajiv Asati <raj...@cisco.com> >>> Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson <swm...@swm.pp.se>, nanog list <nanog@nanog.org> >>> Subject: Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN >>> >>> > >>> >On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Rajiv Asati (rajiva) >>> ><raj...@cisco.com> 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' ? > > > > > > > > >