I'm not sure what you are saying: Are you arguing that UDP-Lite is
deployable in a NAT environment for IPv6? That AMT could calculate a
UDP-Lite checksum? Or both, or something different?
Could you say a little more please?
Gorry Fairhurst
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
I too would welcome further comments on either [ ... ] draft.
In both documents: I find the arguments against UDP-Lite with a
checksum coverage of 8 to be unconvincing.
Mike Heard
------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
