Quality Quorum wrote: > > 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.
We have a couple of RFCs about that, but since it's tired old argument, let's just not go there yet again. Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
