[141652] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Roesen)
Fri Jun 10 03:14:30 2011
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 09:14:25 +0200
From: Daniel Roesen <dr@cluenet.de>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20110609232947.A447C10AA73A@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 09:29:47AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> DS-lite and NAT444 don't break existing applications.
They do, to different degrees. There is plenty of evidence for that.
> > Each solution fits well for some set of constraints and objectives
Pick your poison. :-)
Best regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
