On Wednesday 06 August 2008 13:00:11 ext Iljitsch van Beijnum, you wrote: > Let me once again emphasize that the two approaches are very similar > when it comes to the translation part. > > The scenario where a regular tunnel is terminated and IPv4 packets > with RFC 1918 source addresses are then translated by a NAT44 is > rather suboptimal because it requires configuration/provisioning of an > address to the source host that is unique within the scope of the > NAT44.
I consider that uniqueness is a feature... it allows seamless connectivity within the realm in question. -- Rémi Denis-Courmont Maemo Software, Nokia Devices R&D _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
