Keith Moore wrote:
RJ Atkinson wrote:Gentle People, At the 6AI BOF held at IETF last week, there seemed to be rough consensus on the definitions for these 2 terms: IPv6 NAT: Generic term for any sort of NAT/NAPT/SAT for IPv6::IPv6 deployment NAT66: Precise, specific, term for the proposal documented in draft-mrw-behave-nat66-*.txtI think it's useful to be able to describe not just IPv6-to-IPv6 NAT, but any kind of NAT between IPvx and IPvy. Since there's already some established use for NAT66 and some other examples of that pattern, I suggest we use the pattern xyNAT for NATs between x and y.
But aren't 6-6 and 4-6 special gateway cases that have to do special things anyway and calling them NATs, while technically correct, masks their larger role? They are REALLY needed in the 4/6 transition scheme of things.
_______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
