Re: Issue 41: Mandate NAT prevention if not doing NAT-T?

Francis Dupont <[email protected]> Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:26:56 +0200

Newsgroups	gmane.ietf.mobike
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   > BTW I agree with the proposed text, my concern is it is 
   > incomplete.

   Since you seem to be the one person who thinks this is a 

=> the one is this list...

   serious problem,

=> the MIP WG considered it as serious too.

   perhaps you could also provide some new 
   text that better describes the situation?

=> I'll take some words from draft-dupont-transient-pseudonat-04.txt
where the problem is explained.

Regards

[email protected]