At 18:12 15/01/04, Dean Anderson wrote:
But whether you internetwork with IPv6 and NAT, or just keep IPv4, NAT
will not go likely go away. The math below works out because 9 billion
people don't each need a unique IP address. The vast majority of those
people will be serviced via NAT, as cable
The Anti-Spam Research Group (ASRG) of the IRTF is seeking feedback and
volunteers from the wider IETF community. We have recently changed our
charter to focus on approaches that can be defined, deployed and used in
the near term, likely to lead to usable results, and to avoid those that
Consistent with my December update, there have not been many further
comments on the IAB Advisory Committee report. The IAB has requested
that the RFC-Editor publish the document
(draft-iab-advcomm-01.txt).
One substantive point of discussion that has come up more than
once is: why does
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 15-jan-04, at 18:12, Dean Anderson wrote:
But whether you internetwork with IPv6 and NAT, or just keep IPv4, NAT
will not go likely go away.
Directly internetworking IPv4 and IPv6 (where an IPv4-only host talks
to an IPv6-only host) is
