[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

That noted, there are well known RFCs published already on
the dangers of NATing, so I'm not sure what good it would do
to put something in the Node Requirements document.

Finally, I actually don't know what a reasonable requirement
would be to add to cover this.  If you think you have good text,
please send it on the mailing list.

I think you answered the question already. There are enough widely
deployed applications (sip for instance) which don't really work over
NAT. Given this it would be unfortunate if we didn't take every
oportunity to ensure that those applications won't break in ipv6.

Cheers Leif

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to