ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [BEHAVE] Lack of need for 66nat : Long term impact to application developers

2008-11-25 18:23:48
Tony,

On Nov 25, 2008, at 2:10 PM, Tony Hain wrote:
There is no valid reason for 66nat.

Then it will die in the marketplace and any standardization efforts will simply fade away.

The only justifications being given are
'people will do it anyway', and 'we have to move quickly because vendors are trying to build it'. This is called railroading in any other context, and absolutely no long term thought is going into the impact and inability to
remove this once it is unleashed.

So, if vendors are trying to build it, it would seem to me that an industry group focused on standardizing its functionality would be a good thing, otherwise we get into the same mess we got into with IPv4.

If vendors aren't trying to build it, no significant harm is done (other than the waste of time for folks participating in the standardization).

Putting our fingers in our ears and singing "la la la" because we don't think a particular technology should exist is unlikely to be particularly beneficial.

Regards,
-drc

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>