NAT Behavioral Requirements for TCP
RFC 5382

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 08 and is now closed.

(Jari Arkko) Yes

(Lars Eggert) (was Discuss) Yes

Comment (2007-04-16)
No email
send info
[Editing nits emailed to authors directly.]

(Cullen Jennings) (was Discuss) Yes

Magnus Westerlund Yes

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Ross Callon) No Objection

(Lisa Dusseault) No Objection

(Sam Hartman) No Objection

Comment (2007-04-17 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
I'm not making this a discuss, but I consider it a significant
limitation that this document does not consider the implications of an
external address being used both for local traffic to the NAT and for
translated traffic.  I think the requirements for handling internal
SYNs are very challenging to deal with in this situation and guidance
would almost certainly improve implementation quality here.  I've seen
significant problems with NATs getting issues like this wrong for UDP.

(Russ Housley) No Objection

(Chris Newman) No Objection

(Jon Peterson) No Objection

(Tim Polk) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu) No Objection

(Mark Townsley) No Objection

(David Ward) No Objection