On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 15:13, Doug Barton <dougb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 02/10/2012 10:22, Chris Grundemann wrote: >> This is not about IPv4 life-support. > > Seriously? Seriously. The birth of a shared CGN space in no significant way extends the life of IPv4. It does provide the best possible solution to a necessary evil (CGN inside addresses). >> This is about providing the best answer to a difficult problem. > > The best answer is to make sure that CPEs that will be doing CGN can > handle the same 1918 space inside the user network and at the CGN layer. Are you volunteering to buy everyone on earth a new CPE? If not, who do you suggest will? My bet is that no one is willing to drop the billions of dollars required - if they were, we could just sign everyone up for IPv6 capable CPE and skip the whole debate... ;) Cheers, ~Chris > Doug > > -- > > It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short. > > Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. > Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/ > -- @ChrisGrundemann http://chrisgrundemann.com _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf