On 2016/07/21 23:56, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) wrote:
WG There was a discussion in the NVO3 WG meeting in Berlin following strong advice from our Area Director that we need to come to a consensus on converging on a common encapsulation. Two sets of questions were asked: (1) Should the WG move forward with one standards track encap? (2) For a given encap, do you have significant technical objections?
I want to inform to this mailing list that I proposed ME6E-FP and ME6E-PR at the yokohama meeting. I also have proposal M46E-FP and M46E-PR (past called SA46T).
These encapsulation technologies are based on address mapping. ME6E use IPv6 address which mapping MAC address, and M46E use IPv6 address which mapping IPv4 address.
I understand too many encapsulation technologies, however these my proposal are simple, and may contribute to the Internet.
I believe address mapping approach is unique, so I want to propose again. sorry not the answer to the question. Naoki Matsuhira _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
