> Finally, this proposal does nothing to solve the problem it > identifies, legacy IPv4 hosts in the enterprise environment that will > not migrate. There appears to be an unstated assumption that > administrators of legacy hosts will make the changes necessary for > this inconsistent and underspecified proposal, despite the > demonstrated fact that they are unwilling to make the well documented > changes to deploy IPv6 because they simply refuse to make a change, or > to learn something new. exactly. enterprises have een controllong their environments and permissions across it based on ip assignment via dhcp for a few decades. and ipv4 nat is a much easier and cheaper way to get their job done than trying to deal with ipv6. in general, i do not find it a very viable business strategy to tell my customers to do things they just do not want to do. pushing water uphill. and we have been so good at denial for a decades. we blamed the operators. we blamed the cpe vendors. we blamed the router vendors. and now we blame the users. it's always someone else's fault. randy