[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Status of NAT-PT solution
- To: EricLKlein@softhome.net
- Subject: Re: Status of NAT-PT solution
- From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 07:51:54 +1200
- Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ikt3IdNOVejjDXj0C7mLuysf5TizL+dzQapQv3JvEMAOGQPjQLBUfOzRL4MD6a+WgzJSVqA2OQuct4r/ab696wB0C/V6r+aegNP3YoMlQKMd/wJI3JEKYOAiDL+JDovUIHsNWqO2bz6KVh5Ql6UV8A9cmTscgFSHv6ExR4WkHCk=
- In-reply-to: <courier.482885D7.000014BC@softhome.net>
- Organization: University of Auckland
- References: <courier.482885D7.000014BC@softhome.net>
- User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
Eric,
This is still work in progress, so there is no "correct"
reference right now. I think there will be some more
drafts before Dublin.
Brian
On 2008-05-13 06:00, EricLKlein@softhome.net wrote:
>
> Now that NAT-PT has move to historical, is there a consensus or
> direction on how NAT-PT like services are going to be implemented?
> What is the status and the correct work to reference for future
> implementation documentation?
> Eric
>
>