On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
> >> The same people are also trying to understand why a number of > >> applications doesn't work in their network and how come that trojan > >> send their password file to a unknown destination. Private addresses > >> comes at a cost that is becoming more and more apparent. No need to > >> pay > >> that price in IPv6 as well as in IPv4. > > > > You can uniquely map each and every local address to a combination of a > > single /64 + 64-bit unique id. So, organizations who care can have > > static > > mapping. > > Or real addresses? Yes, but I would not be surprised to see a lot of organizations selecting private space + NAT. I do not think that there is a compelling case to do otherwise. > >> If you absolutely want NAT take a random address block and NAT it for > >> you. You will get the same problems / benefits. > > > > It would be nice to know that this block is not used for something > > else. > > > Uhm, site-local blocks will most definite be used for something else... > > - kurtis - > Thanks, Aleksey -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
