On Jul 30, 2012, at 11:08 , Michael Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > > If we believe that ipv6 is ready to go for mass deployment, why do we > not pressure home router vendors to default to sending router advertisements > with ULA addresses that, if necessary, get NAT'd at the border just like > 192.168 space does today. > > I mean, nothing bad would happen, right?
What does the conditional phrase "if necessary" mean in your mind? Under what circumstances do you imagine this would not be "necessary" for operational continuity? -- james woodyatt <[email protected]> member of technical staff, core os networking _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
