> I can't really see the motivations to do NAT under v6 when it's so easy > to have multiple addresses on an interface anyway. Joining 2 networks > which use the same address site-local addresses would be nowhere near > as painfull as before since it's that much easier to re-number one of > them under v6. > I agree, under the autoconfigure feature you should be able to do this easily.
Say that both networks were using the FE8::xxxx:xxxx network, then one of them could change this to FE9::xxxx:xxxx prior to the merge, and then just link them. Should be a piece of cake. An alternative would be simply to go from both being FE8::xxxx:xxxx to one being FE8:1::xxxx:xxxx and the other being FE8:2::xxxx:xxxx This way there would be the ability of splitting sites and such by the thousands, and only using NAT for the public Internet connections. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
