IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [NAT] Re: the future of the NAT working group

Matt Holdrege <matt.holdrege@verizon.net> Thu, 18 October 2001 22:30 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA20886; Thu, 18 Oct 2001 18:30:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA25827; Thu, 18 Oct 2001 18:18:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA25789 for <nat@optimus.ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2001 18:18:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA20758 for <nat@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2001 18:18:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from matt.verizon.net (lsanca1-ar5-211-052.lsanca1.dsl.gtei.net [4.33.211.52]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net with ESMTP ; id f9IMHF313459 Thu, 18 Oct 2001 17:17:15 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20011018151553.00abd8b0@mail.gte.net>
X-Sender: res06gzk@mail.gte.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 15:17:15 -0700
To: Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu>, nat@ietf.org, srisuresh@yahoo.com
From: Matt Holdrege <matt.holdrege@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: [NAT] Re: the future of the NAT working group
In-Reply-To: <200110182201.f9IM18J08072@eecs.harvard.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Sender: nat-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: nat-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Network Address Translation <nat.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: nat@ietf.org

At 03:01 PM 10/18/2001, Scott  Bradner wrote:
>We would actually like to close the WG now.

If I'm the only one objecting, then go ahead and close it.

>The MIB may take quite a while since some rather basic thinking
>needs to be done on what a NAT MIB should do.  We do not see
>that there has been enough going on relative to that in the WG
>to warrant keeping the WG open.

This is the first I've heard of any basic issues with the NAT MIB. Have 
there been any issues brought up on the list that I might have missed? I 
thought the NAT MIB was pretty much done.



_______________________________________________
nat mailing list
nat@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email