Re: on NAT-PT

[itojun@iijlab.net]

>>it seems to me that modifying an IPv6 host for transition purposes
>>is not an option.  basically it makes IPv6 hosts aware of NAT-PT (or
>>whatever) translation in the middle, hence similar to RSIP model.
>I don't believe we should have a black-and-white attitude regarding
>this. I don't think that hosts developers can ignore that a transition
>is going on, at least during the next few years. Clearly, the best way
>for a host to support the transition is to be simply dual stack. Do you
>want to preclude hosts taking an in-between position, i.e. not
>dual-stack but still nat-pt aware?=20

	that describes my position - "NAT-PT/whatever aware" node is not
	an option.  it might look okay as shortterm workaround but will hurt
	us in the future.

	FYI, we have been there already - KAME DNS resolver code had an
	environment variable for setting address-translation prefix on the
	client side, we noticed that it is a bad thing, and it got removed.
	so this is from actual operational experience.

itojun