Subject: [NSIS] NATFW issue 28: Keep Port Parity field/semantics

From: Martin Stiemerling <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 15:42:46 +0200

>From the NATFW issue tracker:
"Nodes may request NATs to keep the parity of the transport layer ports"

My suggestion:
>From issue 29:
Dave Oran said in an email on 15 July 2005:
"The alternative is to not worry about this at all and assume everybody 
will
have implemented RFC3605 by now."

My recommendation: Same here as in issue 29, do not include Port Parity
Field and use RFC 3605.

Anybody objections to close issue 28?

_______________________________________________
nsis mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis