On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 09:36:07AM +0000, Paul Robinson wrote: > > But that app has to be something particularly splendid. And in Europe at > least, NAT is not as prevalent as some think it is.
It is prevalent wherever there is broadband. And that is where (with the extra bandwidth and always-on) connectivity into the network is desirable. > Are you suggesting then, that all RFCs based on IPv6 should be... stopped? > By the sounds of it, what you're looking for is for us as a community to > refuse to deal with IPv4 any more, that we wash our hands of it, and make > vendors realise that they are going to be unable to support IPv4 for more > than a few years? IPv4+NAT will coexist with IPv6 for many years. A home router can easily offer v4/NAT and v6 together. This allows v6 apps to be used opportunisticly between homes or other networks that would otherwise have NAT and need some 3rd party broker. > It's brutal, but I can see the point. Thinking about a cut-off date for IPv4 > would indeed provoke some interesting discussion, but I think a lot of > people still want to hang onto IPv4. Even so, how does July 31st 2005 sound > to everybody? That's rather insane :) More like July 31st 2025 before we remove IPv4, and even then it'll hang around... remember no-one *has* to install IPv6, it's just an option if you want the functionality. Users want features not protocols. Tim
