On 06.11.2025 06:13 Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Absence of NAT seems like a feature to me. > Only if IETF would fix multi-hop multi-prefix solution for the > business site. Home Networking WG did fail. SHIM6 failed too. Till > that time, NAT is the only solution for business. You seem to have no experience with real redundancy. Those NAT solutions cannot provide it. You can reach the same situation with NAT66 like with NAT44, if you really want. Real redundancy solutions exist and certain businesses use it. -- kind regards Marco Send spam to [email protected]
pgpt7_w3gmdsY.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/DZAUF66Y32I5KB5KBV6PF6I7ZJ7E34K4/
