Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
Dave Crocker writes:
Bob Hinden wrote:
Maybe we are getting to the point in time where we should only have
IPv6 at IETF meetings or it that's premature run IPv4 behind a couple
of layers of NAT.
On the theory that the ietf meeting net is for production services,
wouldn't it make sense to have the time to cut over to pure ipv6 be
when production use of ipv4 becomes minimal?
IMNSHO, the sensible time is to do it when the relevant RIR runs out of
addresses. I'm sure the IETF can get a couple of thousand IPv4 addresses
for temporary use even years after that time, but it would seem a little
hypocritical to do so.
The network at both of IETF meetings I've attended felt a little
archaic: abundant addresses, no paperwork, no firewall, no NAT.
So basically, you're complaining that you came to the IETF and received
production quality Internet service?
Arnt
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf