IPv6 transition technologies

[itojun at itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino)]

> NAT-PT really needs to be wiped off the face of the earth.  It provides
> all of the disadvantages of IPv4+NAT with all of the transition costs of
> IPv6.  If there is ever any significant penetration of NAT-PT, then the
> pseudo-IPv6 network will not be able to support any more kinds of
> applications than the NATted IPv4 does today.

	i tend to agree, but in rfc-index.txt i could not find the change of
	state to "Historic".  what happend to very similar (and much more evil
	IMHO) transition technology, SIIT?

itojun

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf