On 2011-08-18 22:03, GangChen wrote: > 2011/8/18, Simon Perreault <simon.perrea...@viagenie.ca>: >> On 2011-08-18 09:59, GangChen wrote: >>> NAT44 is one of three >>> fundamental functions in A+P architecture. Otherwise, it can’t connect >>> to legacy end-hosts. >> >> What if in my deployment scenario there are no "legacy" end hosts? What >> if all hosts implement A+P-style port ranges? >> >> I'm with Nejc here. A+P/4rd/... do not require NAT44. > > And then, how many hosts could support "what if" in the wild
It's your deployment scenario that requires NAT44, not 4rd itself. I'm not denying that this deployment scenario is important. Many of us are considering the same scenario. All I'm saying is that there is another scenario where 4rd would also be applicable that would not require NAT44. Simon -- DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca NAT64/DNS64 open-source --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca STUN/TURN server --> http://numb.viagenie.ca _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list Softwires@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
