I think it's important to publish this document, to make it
clear why NAT-PT is a solution of very dubious value.
Brian
On 2007-02-27 20:14, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the IPv6 Operations WG (v6ops) to
consider the following document:
- 'Reasons to Move NAT-PT to Historic Status '
<draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt> as an Informational RFC
This document recommends that the IESG reclassifies RFC 2766 from
Standards Track to Experimental status.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
