[111980] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Confusion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Bush)
Tue Feb 17 21:23:43 2009
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 11:23:37 +0900
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: "Steven Lisson" <stevel@dedicatedservers.net.au>
In-Reply-To: <C035DD0A88EFF241A24578B7B8D5B505014B90CB@intranet.mail.hostingshop.com.au>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> 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
