On Apr 3, 2009, at 7:45 AM, Keith Moore wrote:
I 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.
Yes. But the problem is that NAT46 and NAT44 are also specific proposals, and NAT66 actually *is* a specific proposal. I'm with you on wanting a generic name, but trying to coopt the names of specific proposals as generic names just confuses things. Please stop confusing things.
_______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
