ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [BEHAVE] Lack of need for 66nat : Long term impact to applicationdevelopers

2008-11-26 15:39:41
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
Could we agree on a consensus point that:
 
'Any application developer who designs a protocol on the assumption it
will not be subject to NAT66 may be disappointed'

I think it would be far more constructive to tell application developers
what they _can_ assume... and to make sure that they have enough "safe"
assumptions to implement not only client-server apps but also multiparty
protocols with referrals.

(And trying to make it all hinge on DNS names is a non-starter)

Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf