> From: Spencer Dawkins [mailto:spencer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > I don't know how this would work, but if it could be made to > work, that might be very helpful. It can work if the objective is to develop an interoperable architecture for NAT. It is not going to work if the objective is to explain to NAT vendors why they are so misguided, or to cripple the NAT translation scheme in order to ensure that the incentive to upgrade to IPv6 is not diluted. If facilitating deployment was part of my annual goals I would be attempting to achieve that by establishing a vendor led consortium to produce an IPv6 aware NAT box specification. I would establish a brand for the transition box and ensure that the brand had immediate value by ensuring it gave immediate value by removing the random component from NAT/protocol interactions.
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf