Hi Ketan, Thank you for your comments and questions, please see my feedback inline[Chongfeng]: >Hello Chongfeng/Authors, >I understand that the problem statement that you are looking to address is >to provide a connectivity service for two IPv4 hosts over a service >provider network with IPv6-only underlay that uses SRv6. Is this correct? [Chongfeng]: Not only the connectivity service for two IPv4 hosts over IPv6-only underlay, but also that of IPv6 host to IPv4 host. >If so, this is a solved problem and documented in RFC9252: >https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9252.html#section-5.3 OR >https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9252.html#section-5.1 depending on >whether the service is VPN or Internet connectivity. [Chongfeng]: For the case of IPv6-only deployment, since IPv6 users need to access IPv4 Internet service, in this case, user can have only IPv6 address, so the approach needs to consider translation as well as encapsulation. >Note that this uses End.DT4 (or other similar) SIDs defined in RFC8986 >This solution builds on BGP RFC 5549/8950 which allows signaling of IPv4 >prefixes using IPv6 BGP NHs. [Chongfeng]: RFC5549/8950 deals with how to advertise IPv4 Network Layer Reachability Information with an IPv6 Next Hop, it does not consider how to create the IPv6 address of the new packet for transmission in IPv6-only network. In the new approach, the location of IPv4 address in IPv6 network is identified by IPv6 mapping prefix, when the IPv6 mapping prefix is available, so the IPv6 address can be created by mapping, that is appending IPv4 address to its corresponding IPv6 mapping refix, this works both for translation and encapsulation. >We can meet offline in Prague if you would like to discuss further. [Chongfeng]: This is OK for me.
>Thanks, >Ketan Best regards Chongfeng
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
