[137177] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Looking for an IPv6 naysayer...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Andrews)
Wed Feb 9 19:08:33 2011
To: "George Bonser" <gbonser@seven.com>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 09 Feb 2011 12:23:30 -0800."
<5A6D953473350C4B9995546AFE9939EE0BC1397D@RWC-EX1.corp.seven.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 11:07:26 +1100
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
In message <5A6D953473350C4B9995546AFE9939EE0BC1397D@RWC-EX1.corp.seven.com>, "
George Bonser" writes:
> > Cost's might be lower but service will be worse. NAT breaks a lot of
> > applications file sharing will not work properly and running your own
> > web server at home will not work properly. Well you always get what
> you
> > pay for and people will buy any crap if it is cheap enough.
> >=20
> > Jens
>
> While that is true, it is no worse than the situation right now. In the
> US, the vast majority of users are already behind a NAT (I would say
> over 90% of them are) so they are already experiencing this breakage. =20
But for the most part they can work around breakages with a single NAT.
Double NAT prevents most of the work arounds working.
Mark
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
