![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
I think it's important to publish this document, to make it clear why NAT-PT is a solution of very dubious value.
Brian
The IESG has received a request from the IPv6 Operations WG (v6ops) to consider the following document:
- 'Reasons to Move NAT-PT to Historic Status ' <draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic-00.txt> as an Informational RFC
This document recommends that the IESG reclassifies RFC 2766 from Standards Track to Experimental status.
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.