Re: IPv6 transition technologies

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2007-07-01 18:56, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
NAT-PT really needs to be wiped off the face of the earth.  It provides
all of the disadvantages of IPv4+NAT with all of the transition costs of
IPv6.  If there is ever any significant penetration of NAT-PT, then the
pseudo-IPv6 network will not be able to support any more kinds of
applications than the NATted IPv4 does today.

	i tend to agree, but in rfc-index.txt i could not find the change of
	state to "Historic".  what happend to very similar (and much more evil
	IMHO) transition technology, SIIT?

If you look at draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt (the
draft that obsoletes NAT-PT), it is quite critical of SIIT
(RFC 2765), but does not obsolete it.

[I attempted to obsolete SIIT before it was written (RFC 1671
section B) but that didn't work :-) . There are parts of
RFC 1671 that are wrong, but not that part.]

    Brian

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]