On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Terry Gray wrote: > On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Keith Moore wrote: > > > one of the areas in which I think the IPv4 design failed is that it > > didn't really follow the catenet model. it was not possible to extend > > the network from any point. and this is part of what led to NATs, > > because there really was a need to be able to do that. > >... > > 2. Essentially free addresses are really important to a lot of people, > especially anyone responsible for bunches of machines... Without them, > something like NAT is guaranteed to persist, in order to minimize > cost. And the growing adoption of virtualization will contribute further to the numbers of "machines" needing unique addressibility ... Dave Morris _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf