On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 14:17, Benson Schliesser <bens...@queuefull.net> wrote:
> If you have more experience (not including rumors) that suggests otherwise, > I'd very much like to hear about it. I'm open to the possibility that NAT444 > breaks stuff - that feels right in my gut - but I haven't found any valid > evidence of this. In case you have not already found this: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-donley-nat444-impacts-01 Cheers, ~Chris > > Regardless, I think we can agree that IPv6 is the way to avoid NAT-related > growing pains. We've known this for a long time. > > Cheers, > -Benson > > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (arin-p...@arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. > -- @ChrisGrundemann weblog.chrisgrundemann.com www.burningwiththebush.com www.theIPv6experts.net www.coisoc.org