[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

IPv6 Confusion

Subject: IPv6 Confusion
From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 11:23:37 +0900
In-reply-to: <C035DD0A88EFF241A24578B7B8D5B505014B90CB@intranet.mail.hostingshop.com.au>
References: <6CDE22DE80A63A4DACF4FE2C916519A53F022F784D@BLV11EXVS01.corp.dm.local> <[email protected]> <6CDE22DE80A63A4DACF4FE2C916519A53F022F788E@BLV11EXVS01.corp.dm.local> <050701c99135$df0f0ed0$9d2d2c70$@net> <m2hc2s1uip.wl%[email protected]> <C035DD0A88EFF241A24578B7B8D5B505014B90CB@intranet.mail.hostingshop.com.au>

> I find it a shame that NAT-PT has become depreciated

the ietf has recanted and is hurriedly trying to get this back on
track.  of course, to save face, the name has to be changed.

> with people talking about carrier grade NATS I think combining
> these with NAT-PT could help with the transition

cgn is not a transition tool.  it is a dangerous hack to deal with
the problems of a few very large consumer isps who lack sufficient
space to number their customer edge.

randy

Follow-Ups:
- IPv6 Confusion
  - From: brandon.galbraith at gmail.com (Brandon Galbraith)
- IPv6 Confusion
  - From: nanog at daork.net (Nathan Ward)

References:
- IPv6 Confusion
  - From: Carl.Rosevear at demandmedia.com (Carl Rosevear)
- IPv6 Confusion
  - From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
- IPv6 Confusion
  - From: Carl.Rosevear at demandmedia.com (Carl Rosevear)
- IPv6 Confusion
  - From: alh-ietf at tndh.net (Tony Hain)
- IPv6 Confusion
  - From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
- IPv6 Confusion
  - From: stevel at dedicatedservers.net.au (Steven Lisson)

Prev by Date: IPv6 Confusion
Next by Date: IPv6 Confusion
Previous by thread: IPv6 Confusion
Next by thread: IPv6 Confusion
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread