quietly....

Lamar Owen lowen at pari.edu
Thu Feb 3 13:04:45 CST 2011


On Thursday, February 03, 2011 01:35:46 pm Jack Bates wrote:
> I understand and agree that CPEs should not use NAT66. It should even be 
> a MUST NOT in the cpe router draft. 

Do you really think that this will stop the software developers of some CPE routers' OS code from just making it work?  Do you really think the standard saying 'thou shalt not NAT' will produce the desired effect of preventing such devices from actually getting built?





More information about the NANOG mailing list