Hi,
On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 10:11:33AM -0700, Roger Marquis wrote:
> "Some people" sure. A far greater number of us, however, are looking for
> stateful NAT as well.
Two, judging from the posts here on the list. One of them is making valid
points why they find stateful NAT useful, the other one is mostly handwaving.
> Question is, why are a relatively small number of
> stateless NAT (66) proponents being catered to while the majority is
> ignored?
Because none of the "I wanna have NAT!!!" "professionals" has undergone
the effort of actually writing a draft?
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
did you enable IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
_______________________________________________
nat66 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
