On 14 feb 2008, at 21:21, Dan Wing wrote: > What seems useful is a mechanism where the UDP encapsulation can be > attempted and the native (non-UDP encapsulted) protocol can be > attempted. I was thinking along similar lines. Notwithstanding what I said earlier, sometimes encapsulating something in UDP to make it pass through whathever needs passing through can be useful. For instance, there have been one or two occasions where I could have used IPv6 in UDP encapsulation but without all the baggage that comes with Teredo. But it seems to me that a much better approach to this is first of all to make it optional, like you suggest, and secondly, make it a generic mechanism that can be used for ALL protocols rather that define it separately for one protocol at a time. In essence, something like this would increase the address lenght by 16 bits. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf