Le 2 nov. 2010 à 04:52, Christian Huitema a écrit : >> A stateful NAT66 is the same as a NAT44 with the code extended to work with >> IPv6 addresses. >> Maybe a draft would be useful to say it. > > There are many design options, and they do not have all the same effect.
Of course, everybody knows it. But a statement like the following, from Roger Marquis, holds in my understanding for all the variants: "A far greater number of us, however, are looking for stateful NAT as well. Question is, why are a relatively small number of stateless NAT (66) proponents being catered to while the majority is ignored?". > For example one could design a stateful NAT that merely translates addresses > and leaves port numbers alone. That would have a very different effect on > applications than a NAT that also translates port numbers! Do you really believe I need this explanation?? RD _______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
