I will get back to your original comments in the next msg, but I feel
the need to first correct potentially a very big error in the above:
would you please kindly point to the exact text in draft-iab-ipv6-
that either stated or implied "end-to-end *locator* transparency", as
you attributed to the draft?
Hi Lixia -
I used the term "locator transparency" to distinguish this from other
types of transparency, such as data transparency or, in a world with
identifier-locator separation, identifier transparency. I found this
useful given that I was talking about identifier-locator separation.
Consequently, "locator transparency" in my posts has the meaning of "IP
address transparency", i.e., the type of transparency that NATs break.
Since your document is about NAT, I am assuming that this is also the
type of transparency that you are referring to in your document.
Ietf mailing list