Please, any input into this debate shall go to the behave list. People interested in this topic please subscribe to Behave.
Regards Magnus Peter Dambier skrev: > Keith Moore wrote: > >> absolutely it's too onerous. why in the world should an application's >> deployability depend on the existence of a server that lives in global >> address space -- or for that matter, on a bank of servers that exist to >> do nothing but forward traffic? isn't that what the network is supposed >> to do? > > That is what bothers me too. sip is mostly peer to peer, so for most > of your communication (in megabytes) no server in a rack needed. > > Email, with fixed IPv6 addresses will become peer to peer again too. > > html? html is not much traffic. Many people do html hehind their NAT44 > boxes today. > > There is still a lot to be done for zeroconf, so DNS still is ok > with a server in a rack. > > Oh, I forgot. For DNS you are still dependent on IPv4. > > All the enthusiasts with their linux and freebsd boxes using ISATAP > to communicate don't see a need for NAT66. It is the big guys with > big windows servers who really need NAT66 to hide their fragile > machines from the bad wild internet. > > I am one of those poor guys who has never been told what good NAT66 > can do for him. I am still troubled by NAT44 preventing me from > connecting with my ISATAP interface. > > I am running more than one computer. That is why I am imprisoned > behind my NAT44 and I am afraid NAT66 will be yet another prison. > > I have seen with tunneling (slow as molasses) I get only a single /128. > So I guess a bilingual router will sit on both his single IPv4 and > another single IPv6 and keep all the traffic for himself letting > me do the guesswork how to drill the holes I need to connect to > the internet. > > I see with IPv6 I do have to compete with my fridge and the > central heating drilling holes to talk to the butcher, the baker > and the oil-tanker. None of them is living in a rack in a colocation. > They all have to drill holes into their NAT66 to talk to my home. > > There is a hole industry living from selling me super excluse > and expensive drilling machinery, I would not need if there was > not a NAT66 in the first place. > > I know NAT44 is like my front door and keeps the bad internet out. > But it is not NAT44, it is the firewall who keeps them out. > > Only a vague feeling for symmetry keeps telling me I should have > a NAT66. > > Math is telling me that need not be true. IPv4 brought us from > point to point clothes line to 2-dimensional space spanning > continents. IPv6 will bring us 3-dimensional space spanning > the globe and DNT will bring us even further. I do not know if > there is such a thing as NAT66 existing. > > In 2-D space we do have trigons, squares, pentagons, hexagon... > In 3-D space live stops with things built from pentagons. > > The guys with their big windows servers behind NAT44 are living > in a 2-D world, dreaming their 2-D dreams bout selling us > 3-D NAT66 boxes without even knowing the math. > > Kind regards > Peter > -- Magnus Westerlund IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ericsson AB | Phone +46 10 7148287 Färögatan 6 | Mobile +46 73 0949079 SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
