James,
> In simpler terms, what I want is a document that clearly implies 6to4-PMT > is not applicable with this new Shared CGN Address Space. No, I am not > joking, and I'm very sorry that I had to bring up the topic of 6to4 again. > > I appreciate your position. I am also biased as much as you and others are on this. But I would like to point out that PMT has worked in a large production network with much success (as ugly as one may think it is). The reality is that it works, and works well when using non-RFC1918 on CGN zone endpoints. When 6to4 goes away or Native is enabled, so will PMT (for those who choose to use it). regards, Victor > > -- > j h woodyatt <[email protected]> > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf >
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
