On 16-Oct-2005, at 03:37, David Conrad wrote:
Shifting the NAT to end system removed the objection to NAT, tho
it's not entirely clear why. Shifting NAT to the end system also
happened to simplify the entire solution as well.
Except for the part about having to rewrite all existing
implementations to take full advantage of the technology.
Thought experiment: how many different software vendors need to
change their shipping IPv6 code in order for some new feature like
shim6 to be 80% deployed in the server and client communities of hosts?
I'm thinking it's probably less than 5, but I'd be interested to hear
opinions to the contrary.
Joe
