[126054] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Smith)
Thu Apr 29 07:20:15 2010
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 20:49:29 +0930
From: Mark Smith <nanog@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org>
To: Dave Pooser <dave.nanog@alfordmedia.com>
In-Reply-To: <C7FE1B19.2424DB%dave.nanog@alfordmedia.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:04:25 -0500
Dave Pooser <dave.nanog@alfordmedia.com> wrote:
> > IPv6's fundamental goal is to restore end-to-end.
>
> For some. For many, IPv6's fundamental goal is to keep doing what we've been
> doing without running out of addresses. The fact that the two camps have
> orthogonal goals is probably part of the reason the rate of growth on IPv6
> is so slow.
Well they should realise that end-to-end is what made the Internet the
success in the first place. On the Original Internet, when you had an
IP address, one moment you could be a client, another you could be a
server, or another you could be a peer - or you could be any or all
three roles at the same time. What role you wanted to play was
completely and absolutely up to you - no third parties to ask
permission of, no router upgrades involved. You just started the
(client/server/peer-to-peer) software, and off you went.
The applications exist at the edge of the Internet - in the software
operating on the end-nodes. The Internet itself is supposed to
be a dumb, best effort packet transport between the edges - nothing
more. That is why the Original Internet was good at running any
application you threw at it, including new ones - because it never
cared what those applications were. It just tried to do it's job of
getting packets from edge sources to edge destinations, regardless of
what was in them.
