Remi Respres wrote: I acknowledge that NAT444 does not use two levels of private networks, which makes me not sure what your point is. > (AFAIK, some mobile phones include NAT44s, and work on mobile > networks that assign 10.x.y.z addresses). I'm afraid the mobile phone with an external IP address of 10.1.2.3 will likely to have difficulties if its internal client also have the IP address of 10.1.2.3. > Problems can occur with some CPEs that don't comply with RFC 5382, RFC5382 is, by no means, a deployed standard. > In my understanding, although NAT444 + 6rd is far from being the > only model to offer IPv6 service while dealing with the IPv4 > address shortage, IT IS a deployable approach. > For some ISPs, it has a very good performance/cost ratio. That's an argument similar to ones heard for these 15 years. Masataka Ohta _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf