On 7 nov 2008, at 19:18, EricLKlein@softhome.net wrote:
This is why we have RFC 4864, and the comment that the IETF does not support NAT in IPv6. We need to find a way to make it crystal clear that NAT is not part of v6 and using it will be non-standard.And this is why I think this draft will cause more harm than good.
I don't think RFC 4864 is clear enough.If the IETF is serious about avoiding IPv6 NAT, it needs to send out a warning to operators that they WILL have problems if they deploy it.