Re: Merge NAT-PT approaches?

[Norbert Bollow <nb@bollow.ch>]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm sympathetic to the idea. Bringing in the shim action
> only when it's actually needed sounds good in principle.
> The devil is in the details, of course, but we can
> investigate that off-list if people would like us
> to follow this up.

I'm very much in favor of the topic of better variants of
NAT-PT being considered from all angles, and would personally
prefer on-list discussion of the details (or at least Cc: me
please :-)

Greetings,
Norbert.


-- 
Norbert Bollow <nb@bollow.ch>                      http://Norbert.ch
President of the Swiss Internet User Group SIUG    http://SIUG.ch
Working on establishing a non-corrupt and
truly /open/ international standards organization  http://OpenISO.org