That's right today.
Another 5 years later you would be singing a different tune. - scalability,
better bandwidth management (a.k.a QOS), mobile devices, internet appliances
will nail v4 down - UMTS will add some spice to the pot. I agree a user
cannot do much unless the ISPs and Org routers/switches deploy v6. But
that's not too far away as more sophisticated uses come up.
Incidentally, have you tried running apps like ftp over IPsec or L2TP/PPTP
over NAT.
Rinka.
----- Original Message -----
From: "J. Noel Chiappa" <jnc(_at_)ginger(_dot_)lcs(_dot_)mit(_dot_)edu>
To: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Cc: <jnc(_at_)ginger(_dot_)lcs(_dot_)mit(_dot_)edu>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 12:38 AM
Subject: RE: Why IPv6 is a must?
> From: TOMSON ERIC <Eric(_dot_)Tomson(_at_)siemens(_dot_)atea(_dot_)be>
> do you really think that the IETF people (et al.) built IPv6 without
a
> preliminary good consideration?
There are a lot of people in the IETF who think exactly that, actually.
(This message coming to you via the NAT box I bought in the
hole-in-the-wall
computer store in the little strip mall right down the street, here in
Podunksville. Just for grins, I should have asked them if they had any
IPv6... I wonder what the ratio of NAT sales volume is to IPv6, and how
much profit people have made off the former, as opposed to the latter.
Not that I like NAT, I don't.)
Noel