On Jun 30, 2011, at 12:51 AM, Melinda Shore <melinda.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/29/11 8:32 PM, Keith Moore wrote:
>> However it does not follow that home networks need NAT or private address
>> space. Those are hacks of the 1990s. They always were shortsighted, and
>> they turned out to be an operational disaster. We can do better.
>
> We can and should, but it's pretty clear that if the IETF
> were good at evangelizing we wouldn't be in this situation
> in the first place. The focus really needs to be on producing
> good, secure protocols that work on the networks we've got.
...or the networks we can see coming in the near future. ZigBee Alliance is
driving an IPv6-based multi-link architecture through planned deployments of
SE2.0 by several utilities. BBF and CableLabs both expect IPv6, end-to-end
connectivity
Homenet will avoid breaking existing IPv4 deployments in the networks we've got
today, but won't spend resources on unnecessary (in some cases impossible)
feature parity.
- Ralph
>
> Melinda
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
