> I have the following things running around in my brain, and they aren't > converging: > > - We need to provide PI addressing in IPv6, or we will > see wide deployment of IPv6 NAT in enterprises > and homes. No one seems to be disagreeing with > this.
home? Having homes go from one, perhaps unstable, IPv4 address to a /48 PA address is a tremendous improvement. I don't see why homes would require global PI addresses today. On the enterprise side I can see that folks have been bitting or are concerned about renumbering costs if they were to use PA addresses. But I don't have any data on how many consider having one PA prefix per ISP good enough since it allows some graceful cutover when changing ISPs. Erik -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
