Hi, On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 06:09:09PM +0200, Rémi Després wrote: > > Please understand that *your* customers are not the type of networks > > Chris Engel talks about. Residential and enterprise are the most distant > > points in a spectrum - residential *wants* e2e and p2p apps, while > > enterprise > > does *not* want that. > > > > This discussion has been rehashed a number of times now, and it's time > > that the "anti-NAT" crowd starts to accept that e2e is not a desirable > > property in some networks, and thus, this aspect of NAT doesn't do "harm". > > It seems you accept that it may do some "harm" in the residential case (which > is the case I discuss: unmanaged CPEs).
I have not seen anybody in this thread talk about residential CPEs.
To the contrary, my statement above was very clear: for residential, we
*want* e2e and p2p, and that implies "anything that breaks this is bad"
- and for residential, I don't see any benefits of NAT66 at all (in the
single-homed case). But that's not what people are talking about here.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
did you enable IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
pgpapoMPbuCLL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
