On Apr 15, 2004, at 11:16 AM, Fred Templin wrote:
This would not be the same thing as an "IPv6 NAT", which I hope we will never see.
Note that I'm not advocating for IPv6 NAT here.
I'm saying that IPv4 NAT is almost everywhere and during the transition to IPv6, in the phase where the ISPs do not yet support full native IPv6 in the access network, we must take into account that IPv4 NAT may be in the way.
Speaking generally w/o looking at specific scenarios (e.g., 3GPP/2), I would have to agree. All I'm saying is that explicit NAT traversal mechanisms should be used only as a last-resort, and unencumbered IPv6-in-IPv4 tunneling (or, better yet, native IPv6) should be used instead whenever possible.
Fred ftemplin@iprg.nokia.com