Re: Last Call: 'Teredo: Tunneling IPv6 over UDP through NATs' toProposed Standard (fwd)

["EricLKlein" <ericlklein@softhome.net>]

  > ----- Original Message ----- 

  > From: "Jeroen Massar" > General comment:
> > As IPv6 does not support NAT in any native form I would like to see the
term
> > NAT replaced with IPv4 NAT through out the document, and a comment at
the
> > start to the effect that there is no such thing as IPv6 NAT.

  >

  > NAT is an IPv4 only thing, there must be no IPv6 NAT, better to not name
> it separately IMHO.

  >



This is why I think there is a need to be an explicit reference that the
need for Teredo is because NAT was depreciated in IPv6, otherwise the
question will be raised (if read without referencing this fact) as to why it
is not IPv4 NAT to IPv6 NAT.