Since we have established that site-locals will encourage the use of NATs ('cause that's how it's done today)
I really struggle to see why people would use an IPv6-to-IPv6 NAT -- there just doesn't seem to be any incentive.
If you wanted to deploy a NAT, surely you would pick an IPv4-to-IPv4 NAT and use IPv4 address space. The v4 "technology" is way more "mature" than the IPv6 equivalent, and that's how it is done today.
- aidan
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
