On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 11:26:40PM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> >If that is indeed the case then the "enhanced nat" road for ipv6
> >begins to make much more sense, even in the nearer term.
>
> I remember someone saying something about enhanced NAT here a few
> days ago but I can't find it... What is it and what does it have to
> do with IPv6?
It was a term Keith Moore used to describe the addition of
ipv6 capability to NAT devices. Not intended as a real term, merely
a marketing name to explain to the end user the benefit of having
ipv6 capability.
If address space does indeed burn that quickly, ISPs will start to
realize they can't sell additional IP addresses as a way of making a quick
profit. Those with dwindling address pools will begin to demand proper
ipv6 support from router vendors to offer it at a discounted price (compared
to ipv4) to their customers who are savvy enough to want to run servers but
too cheap to buy ipv4 space at a premium.
From there it should only be a matter of time. If key applications work
with ipv6 that will probably be adequate to get the ball rolling.
IIRC there was a similar transition back when virtual web hosting
meant blowing an ip address for every extra domain. After an adequate number
of browsers were upgraded hosting providers made available ip-less virtual
hosts at a heavy discount from ip-burning ones. After a surprisingly short
amount of time the vast majority of browsers were compliant. The final nail was
registries refusing virtual hosting as an excuse to justify allocations.
That's not news to most here, but I definitely see the similarity in the
situation.
Austin
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
