Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-pb-statement-req-0: protocols supported

[marcelo bagnulo braun <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>]

Rémi Denis-Courmont escribió:
> Le vendredi 25 juillet 2008 19:07:48 marcelo bagnulo braun, vous avez écrit :
>   
> > Question: what is the rationale we include TLS here? souyld we have a
> > citeria of which protocols shoudl be in this req?
> >     
>
> Being (wrongly) cut and pasted from the STUN/TURN specs??
>   
:-)
could be, but in this case this is not it
>   
> > Question: should we move DCCP and SCTP to MUST rahter than SHOULD?
> > (Magnus, is this what you were requesting in your emails before?)
> >     
>
> I can't comment on SCTP. But...
>
> If TCP can be translated, DCCP can be translated.
>   
doesn't dccp support multiaddressing?
Regards, marcelo

> If UDP can be translated, UDP-Lite can be translated.
>
>