[address-policy-wg] Mandating NAT toward the final /8
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Mandating NAT toward the final /8
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Mandating NAT toward the final /8
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Masataka Ohta
mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
Thu Jul 16 20:51:06 CEST 2009
Sascha Lenz wrote: > waering all my hats as private internet citizen, network operator for my own network, network architect for a non-commerial organisation supporting new technologies, LIR, ISP, and IT Consultant for big to large customers, i hearby state that i ... To be a good internet citizen, you should read Saltzer's paper on end to end argument. > a) have operational IPv6 networks for 6 years now How many end users do you have? > b) don't like NAT I don't like legacy NAT too because it is not complete nor correct. A direct consequence of the end to end argument is: NAT can completely and correctly be implemented only with the knowledge and help of the end hosts behind a NAT gateway. which is not the case with legacy NAT. > f) don't see a reason to conserve IPv4 space > g) don't see a reason not to migrate to IPv6 The problem, here, is that there is no path to migrate to IPv6. Or, do you still believe dual stack approach work? > i) don't support any more complex NAT setup than we already have in the > wild now Fully agreed. Keep It Simple, Stupid. How do you think about proposals from people desperately working to deploy IPv6 to have complex and stateful NAT between 4 and 6? Masataka Ohta
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Mandating NAT toward the final /8
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Mandating NAT toward the final /8
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]