On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 07:35:21AM -0800, Michel Py wrote:
The reasons are the same why they are currently using NAT with IPv4 even
though they have enough public IPv4 address space. We have discussed
these for ages; if my memory is correct, you are the one that convinced
me some years ago that IPv6 NAT was unavoidable :-)
Hi Michel, nice to hear from you :)
Yes, I personally feel it is inevitable, and of course the IETF won't stop
people deploying it.
The irony in European and US deployment seems to be that the networks that
have deployed IPv6 natively are the very ones that have ample IPv4
address space already (predominantly the academic/research networks) while
the networks that could benefit the most (SOHO) remain IPv4-only.
Noel's 'snake oil' analogy cuts close to the bone, but in the case of IPv6
- as we heard in the IAB plenary last night - ISPs have some motivation
to keep their patients ill ($$ for global addresses).
Nice discussion.
--
Tim/::1
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf