On Nov 8, 2009, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > An argument has been made, and I don't intend to endorse it, that > stateless NAT66 would be a fine solution to the problems of > multihoming, BGP scaling, and renumbering hassles, all in > one simple wrapper.
This brings up a more general question: Should the RRG recommendation be restricted to those solutions that RRG endorses? Or should it also include solutions that have limitations, such as NAT66, along with an explanation of those limitations? Although the latter option is more a solution space analysis than a "recommendation", it would in my opinion be more valuable to the IETF because it would be more comprehensive. Thoughts? > [Something about not shooting messenger goes here.] Jeez, better put this note to the beginning of your email. Putting it at the end is risky. It might be too late. ;-) - Christian _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
