IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IPv7 Selection Criteria

Scott_Brim@cornell.edu Tue, 22 December 1992 14:51 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03801; 22 Dec 92 9:51 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03795; 22 Dec 92 9:50 EST
Received: from babyoil.ftp.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07950; 22 Dec 92 9:53 EST
Received: from MITCHELL.CIT.CORNELL.EDU by ftp.com with SMTP id AA29497; Tue, 22 Dec 92 09:49:11 -0500
Received: from [132.236.195.20] by mitchell.cit.cornell.edu (4.1/1.34/Honig-1.3) id AA12968; Tue, 22 Dec 92 09:48:46 EST
Message-Id: <9212221448.AA12968@mitchell.cit.cornell.edu>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 09:48:34 -0500
To: kasten@ftp.com, Noel Chiappa <jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu>
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Scott_Brim@cornell.edu
X-Sender: swb@nr-tech.cit.cornell.edu
Subject: Re: IPv7 Selection Criteria
Cc: criteria@ftp.com, jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu

Noel, we're talking about limited services for the pockets, not about full
service which would require NAT.  They don't deserve a lot of respect, but
you can't assume you will be able to get rid of them with a transition
period of less than 10 years.
                                                        Scott

At 16:13 12/21/92 -0500, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>Well, if everyone signs onto that, than we can stop most of the debate and all
>go home, since we've just chosen x-NAT (x as yet to be decided), and nobody's
>working on NAT anymore (unless Van has been slaving away in silence, knowing
>what was going to happen and not being able to deal with the rest of us taking
>for ever to wake up).
>
>        Noel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email