I don't do warm and fuzzy in the IETF. I am an engineer and architect. I don't think this mail is even constructive below.
/jim > -----Original Message----- > From: Pekka Savola [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 6:20 AM > To: Michel Py > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bob Hinden; Steven M. Bellovin; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Fwd: IPv6 Scoped Addresses and Routing Protocols > > > On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Michel Py wrote: > > > If there is widespread deployment of systems with site-local only > > > addresses, this will in turn drive the creation of ipv6 NAT > > > specifically to give them external connectivity.. > > > > That looks like a solution without a problem. To give these hosts > > connectivity you just have both the site-local and the > global address. > > Since NAT would not bring anything to the table why > implement it in the > > first place? > > To give folks that think IPv4 private addresses provide security > (especially wrt. incoming connections) a smooth transition > path to IPv6 > and "warm fuzzy feeling". > > -- > Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, > Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" > Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
