On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 18:11:24 -0400 (EDT) Dan Lanciani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IPv6 offers absolutely nothing as a > replacement for NAT's primary function: isolation of the customer network > from the (typically business-driven) address policies of the service > provider(e.g., cost, limits on number and stability, etc.). NAT isolates customer networks from upstream address policies only by severely limiting their functionality. The functionality of an IPv6 network is better than that of a NATted IPv4 network even if the IPv6 address changes frequently. However I agree that we need to define some expectations about address stability - both to serve as models for service agreements between customers and ISPs, and to serve as guidance for applications developers. Keith -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
