RJ Atkinson - le (m/j/a) 4/3/09 4:37 PM:
Gentle People,
At the 6AI BOF held at IETF last week, there seemed to be
rough consensus on the definitions for these 2 terms:
IPv6 NAT: Generic term for any sort of NAT/NAPT/SAT
for IPv6::IPv6 deployment
NAT66: Precise, specific, term for the proposal
documented in draft-mrw-behave-nat66-*.txt
This mail is sent privately to avoid heating more the debate on the
NAT66 list. (BTW is it a list just for Margaret's proposal, or a list
open to other ways to avoid some or all of the NAT44 pitfalls.)
I believe that it is in good faith that you thought that a large
majority of others agreed on the understanding above. But AFAIK this was
not the case.
Personally, I don't remember any significant time to discuss vocabulary
at the 6AI BOF, and any test of consensus on this subject.
Please consider that my understanding, and Keith's, are also in good faith.
IMHO, preempting a generic name, which was already in use, for just one
specific proposal (interesting but highly debatable), as Margaret seems
to succeed doing, doesn't render service to the community.
Regards,
RD
_______________________________________________
nat66 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
