[30933] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IPv6 allocatin (was Re: ARIN Policy on IP-based Web Hosting)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christian Kuhtz)
Fri Sep 1 18:11:44 2000
From: "Christian Kuhtz" <ck@arch.bellsouth.net>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 17:02:25 -0400
Message-ID: <NDBBIHGIMLHECOLBHAACAEFDDNAA.ck@arch.bellsouth.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <39B016B2.A2057570@nominum.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> >> When IPv6 offers something end users or ISPs value over IPv4+NAT.
> > Hah, interesting thought! :-) Perhaps we should push for people to
> > use the IPv4+NAT kludge,
>
> A very large number of folks are using IPv4+NAT now, mostly without
> complaint (or even awareness). I use it myself quite frequently. In a
> limited (albeit typical) mode of communication, NAT works just fine.
> IPv6, on the other hand, does NOT work for the vast majority of people
> on the Internet.
The point was a NAT'ed (masqueraded) network attempting to communicate with
another NAT'ed (masqueraded) network. That does NOT work for the vast majority
of people on the Internet. And it's a conceptual flaw, rather than a lack of
technology penetration (IPv6).
--
Christian Kuhtz, Sr. Network Architect Architecture, BellSouth.net
<ck@arch.bellsouth.net> -wk, <ck@gnu.org> -hm Atlanta, GA
"Speaking for myself only."
