Tony,
On Nov 25, 2008, at 2:10 PM, Tony Hain wrote:
There is no valid reason for 66nat.
Then it will die in the marketplace and any standardization efforts
will simply fade away.
The only justifications being given are
'people will do it anyway', and 'we have to move quickly because
vendors are
trying to build it'. This is called railroading in any other
context, and
absolutely no long term thought is going into the impact and
inability to
remove this once it is unleashed.
So, if vendors are trying to build it, it would seem to me that an
industry group focused on standardizing its functionality would be a
good thing, otherwise we get into the same mess we got into with IPv4.
If vendors aren't trying to build it, no significant harm is done
(other than the waste of time for folks participating in the
standardization).
Putting our fingers in our ears and singing "la la la" because we
don't think a particular technology should exist is unlikely to be
particularly beneficial.
Regards,
-drc
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf