RE: Why?

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

 



> Terry Gray wrote:
> Keith,
> Quick note from the peanut gallery:  I believe your vision is
> only achievable if the address allocation policies for v6 are
> such that every man/woman/child and enterprise can obtain an
> "ample" amount of provider-independent v6 space (or some number
> of address bits that the enterprise can *own*). If people feel
> like they are held hostage to others for the operation of their
> internal enterprise (or home!) networks, you can take it to the
> bank that v6 NAT will become just as pervasive and entrenched
> as v4 NAT is.

This is precisely why I have stated earlier that v6 NAT is unavoidable:
'every man/woman/child and enterprise can obtain an "ample"
amount of provider-independent v6 space'

Catch is we don't know how to make this scalable. We have tried for 10
years and we still don't.

Michel.


_______________________________________________

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]