Not in the IPv6 address space, anyway. And if it is, there's
something wrong and we should put it right.
Just been reading IAB's commentary on IPv6 NAT. It seems to me that
we are perpetuating the worst technology in existence *simply* for one
feature, network mobility, that is better served by proposing new
techniques and technologies and, in particular: we need a simple way
to express host relationships inside an organisation that is
independent of external homing. I refuse to suffer because of NAT any
longer and don't want to accommodate those that prefer it. If IPv6
does ever get wide enough deployment, and I truly hope it does, I
might just *give up* things to accommodate the trouble-free life that
is no NAT.
What do we have right now, first?
Cheers,
Sabahattin
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf