On Oct 28, 2010, at 8:46 PM, Margaret Wasserman wrote: > On Oct 28, 2010, at 3:50 PM, james woodyatt wrote: >> >> If so, then I-D.mrw-nat66 cannot help you; it offers no privacy addressing. >> So, right now, it sounds like there isn't a publicly defined way to solve >> the problem you're here to discuss without using a stateful IPv6/NAT, which >> does well-understood harm to the Internet architecture and the Internet >> community beyond the domain of enterprises that use it. > > NAT66 doesn't interfere in any way with the use of IPv6 privacy addresses.
entirely correct. Keith _______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
