Re: draft for Translator discussion

[Arifumi Matsumoto <arifumi@nttv6.net>]

> I'm sure I'll be derided for eternity and my eat my words, but at the
> moment it looks like the old NAT-PT (2766, iirc) works just fine for
> my deployment/transition needs (for IPv6-only corporate networks).

My boss is in IPv6-only(NAT-PTed) network and has several problems:

- he cannot use Google cache and not a small number of web pages,
 because IPv4 address is embedded in URL.
- he cannot use MSN messenger, because the protocol isn't IPv6 enabled.
- he cannot use Skype and other several softwares, because the protocol
 or software probably don't support IPv6.

IMHO, I agree with Miyata-san in that NAT-PT itself maynot be evil
iff it is placed in the right place and situation.

Regards,
Arifumi Matsumoto