On Jun 30, 2011, at 12:25 AM, Martin Rex wrote: > If IPv6 does not offer the the same properties as the > current IPv4 internet subscription for the average home user > -- which implies NAT, private local network and smooth > local operation when the internet is down -- then > very few will want IPv6 to their homes (I certainly > wouldn't want it), and IPv6 adoption will continue to > drag along for several years. In other words, you think the networks of the future should be every bit as dysfunctional as today's networks. I think we can all agree that (a) ordinary users are not security experts, and (b) practically all network protocol servers are vulnerable to attack. However it does not follow that home networks need NAT or private address space. Those are hacks of the 1990s. They always were shortsighted, and they turned out to be an operational disaster. We can do better. Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf