It is a feature that should be part of the Internet base protocol stack. It is bad enough having to work out which RFCs matter and which should be ignored. Knowing that you have to search out to various other organizations to find secret sauce to make it work is a recipe for chaos. Its bad enough having kludges like the robots.txt file in HTTP. On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 05/31/2010 03:49 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: >> >> So we need to extend the UPNP protocol so that when the local NAT box >> receives a request to open up an external port, it relays the request >> to the carrier NAT. > > So what are you waiting for? Go ahead, read http://upnp.org, find the > relevant WG, propose the extension, talk to implementers, you know the > routine as well as I do. > > Arnt > -- Website: http://hallambaker.com/ _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf