[Jool-list] EAM vs 6052

[Alberto Leiva]

Tore:

Should an SIIT implementation be able to choose to support EAM but not RFC 6052?

Admittedly, the introduction of the draft is saying no:

    The Explicit Address Mapping Table does not replace [RFC6052].

I'm thinking I messed this up in Jool. Currently, if the packet
addresses match, Jool translates using EAM even if there is no pool6
prefix. Should we force Jool to stay disabled in these cases?

The problem with only EAM/translating is that doesn't guarantee every
IPv4 address is translatable. So if an IPv4 router with an
untranslatable address answers an error to IPv6, Jool drops the ICMP
error (RFC 6791 style).

So I'm thinking I need to either force pool6 or create an IPv6
pool6791. Am I going the right way?

Thanks
Alberto