Roger Marquis wrote: > This is false. NAT was implemented long, long before there were > widespread concerns regarding the number of addresses. A larger > reason for NAT was that many of us were using non-routable addresses, > as there was (and still is) no business case for any of our internal > addresses to be publically routable. as long as you want to be stuck with only being able to use applications and transport protocols from the late 20th century, you mean.
_______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
