Le 24 mars 2010 à 11:51, Paul Selkirk a écrit : > This is a reasonable protocol as far as it goes. However, I find it > odd that the draft attempts to articially reduce the scope to a > translating proxy for DS-lite and NAT64 only. > > There is nothing inherent in the base protocol that supports these > restrictions. It is, to all appearances, "a general purpose NAT or > Firewall port reservation protocol."
+1 RD _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
