[114785] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AH or ESP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nathan Ward)
Tue May 26 17:30:01 2009
From: Nathan Ward <nanog@daork.net>
To: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <E697C725-C771-49FB-A315-D1DAF3FD08FE@arbor.net>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 09:29:44 +1200
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 27/05/2009, at 8:11 AM, Roland Dobbins wrote:
>
> On May 27, 2009, at 3:00 AM, Tony Hain wrote:
>
>> Just because you can't use it for IPv4 is no reason to avoid using
>> it for IPv6 now and let its momentum suppress the 66CGN walled
>> garden mindset.
>
> I concur quite strongly with your views on this particular topic,
> but the CGN boat appears to've sailed, AFAICT.
Note that Tony is talking about 6-to-6 NAT, not 6-to-4 NAT or vice
versa (not to be confused with 6to4 tunnelling).
I'm not sure that boat has sailed yet.
--
Nathan Ward
