On 6-jul-2007, at 0:54, Keith Moore wrote:
the problem is that those simple applications share the same
hosts and
network that the other applications do. if you put devices in the
network that only solve problems for the simple applications,
then you
get a network that can only run simple applications.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Hence the part in my previous message about dynamically obtaining
real IPv4 connectivity tunneled over IPv6 when non-simple
applications need to talk to the IPv4 world.
I understand there is a moratorium on new IPv4-IPv6 transition
techniques in effect. I'm not familiar with the precise reasons for
that (I assume it's the huge number of such mechanisms that was being
proposed) but now that we have a better picture of the obstacles that
block the transition from happening, I think it's time to revisit
this and come up with a comprehensive set of transition tools that
together, address the full range of user needs rather than one here
and one there.
In my opinion, dual stack has largely served its purpose here and we
should put that on the back burner and start thinking about going
IPv6-only in parts of the network, because dual stack by definition
means adding complexity while it doesn't provide any benefits at this
time. While IPv6-only has its problems, it does make building a
network simpler. See
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070704-the-declaration-of-ipv6-
independence.html
But I'll take that up on v6ops.
And from an
architectural perspective, address translation is clearly a dead end.
One of the reasons we argue against NATs is not that there aren't
other
major problems, it's that people haven't managed to get the message on
NATs yet.
Well, an iceberg looks very differently depending on whether you look
at it above water or below. The problem with NAT is like almost all
persisting problems: the bad consequences aren't felt in the place
where they're created.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf