At 1:56 AM +0900 7/2/07, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> NAT-PT really needs to be wiped off the face of the earth. It provides
all of the disadvantages of IPv4+NAT with all of the transition costs of
IPv6. If there is ever any significant penetration of NAT-PT, then the
pseudo-IPv6 network will not be able to support any more kinds of
applications than the NATted IPv4 does today.
i tend to agree, but in rfc-index.txt i could not find the change of
state to "Historic". what happend to very similar (and much more evil
IMHO) transition technology, SIIT?
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/idtracker/?search_filename=draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic>
indicates that the document making NAT-PT is in the RFC Editor's
queue.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf