On Jan 25, 2009, at 6:36 PM, james woodyatt wrote:
Which prompts me to ask the annoying question: should hosts be required to opt *IN* or *OUT*? I don't see any reason why hosts should be required to opt OUT, but I'm prepared to hear arguments for it. I expect they will be highly entertaining.
That comment ("hosts should be able to opt out") sounds like an interesting and irrelevant comment. If for example I am using NAT in some form to implement GSE (such as using Lancaster University's prototype Linux implementation), and am using a ULA internal to a network, the ULA will not have routing outside and the only external routing in the network is likely to be a default route leading to the GSE gateway. So the effect of opting out will be to disable external connectivity. Think about the mechanics of this...
_______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
