[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 3gpp-analysis: IMS/SIP transition [RE: NAT-PT Applicabilty for 3GPP]



I'm not sure actually what the problem is.  All it is that folks think
that an optional mechanism for v6-only SIP <-> IPv4 SIP should be
specified.  I don't personally care much for the details, but the SIP
folks probably know better which kind of tool might solve the problem.  If
it's sufficiently close to NAT-PT, why not reuse parts of it and specify
something to create the mappings; if not, maybe it's worth doing something
else.  I just don't think this WG is the right place to define that.

I am not sure what the problem is, either. It is very clear if you have a v4 only
application/node/network, talking to a v6 only application/node/network you need
a protocol translator. It is a no brainer. Why can't we concede that and move on?
The generic protocol translator is a transition mechanism and it belongs in
this WG.

Senthil


--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings