On Oct 27, 2010, at 4:51 PM, Roger Marquis wrote: >> In the real world we recognize that IPv6 is and will continue to go >> nowhere until working NAT64 and NAT66 implementations are available. >> That's not opinion but simple, objective, agenda-free observation. > > Not to imply that there's no demand for stateless NAT in v6, there > certainly is, but it is a small market niche compared to that of stateful > NAT.
which is precisely why a) every NAT proposal (even those that do less harm than others) has to be treated with extreme skepticism. b) if we're going to endorse NATs at all, we need a common mechanism to allow apps to deal with them that applies across all NATs. Keith _______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
