From: Spencer Dawkins [mailto:spencer(_at_)mcsr-labs(_dot_)org]
I don't know how this would work, but if it could be made to
work, that might be very helpful.
It can work if the objective is to develop an interoperable architecture for
NAT.
It is not going to work if the objective is to explain to NAT vendors why
they are so misguided, or to cripple the NAT translation scheme in order to
ensure that the incentive to upgrade to IPv6 is not diluted.
If facilitating deployment was part of my annual goals I would be attempting
to achieve that by establishing a vendor led consortium to produce an IPv6
aware NAT box specification. I would establish a brand for the transition
box and ensure that the brand had immediate value by ensuring it gave
immediate value by removing the random component from NAT/protocol
interactions.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf