Re: Why?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



At 13:09 13/03/2005, Noel Chiappa wrote:
So, yeah, it *is* easier to deploy first and then later make incremental
modifications for scalability - if you like NAT.

May I venture a silly question? What is a NAT today?

I prefer speaking of coreboxes with (among others) a NAT service (*) (as edge smart boxes opposed to middleboxes) and of telemates or endboxes for a non host boxes (sensors, actuators, appliances, etc.).

There are 3 billions telephones,1.3 billions mobiles, 3 billions of TV, 4 billions of radio listeners. Each of them needs an IPv6 address today with 10 to 1000 extensions to support their SNHN (small network/home network) and their "endboxes". Only IPv6, as an IPv4 with longer address" can support them. In that sense I understand IPv6 as the scalability of the initial IPv4 deployment (this has actually nothing todo with IPv6, just with the availability of the numbers for the necessary scaling and directory/routing organization).

Obviously a "user" point of view. Where am I wrong?
jfc

PS (*) as many other services like firewall, application protection, email servers, local NIC and nameservers, OPES, webserver, backup manager, CVS, creditcard transaction, encryption, etc.


_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]