On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 07:35:21AM -0800, Michel Py wrote: > > The reasons are the same why they are currently using NAT with IPv4 even > though they have enough public IPv4 address space. We have discussed > these for ages; if my memory is correct, you are the one that convinced > me some years ago that IPv6 NAT was unavoidable :-)
Hi Michel, nice to hear from you :) Yes, I personally feel it is inevitable, and of course the IETF won't stop people deploying it. The irony in European and US deployment seems to be that the networks that have deployed IPv6 natively are the very ones that have ample IPv4 address space already (predominantly the academic/research networks) while the networks that could benefit the most (SOHO) remain IPv4-only. Noel's 'snake oil' analogy cuts close to the bone, but in the case of IPv6 - as we heard in the IAB plenary last night - ISPs have some motivation to keep their patients ill ($$ for global addresses). Nice discussion. -- Tim/::1 _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
