Keith, If there is a real desire to do something, people will do it regardless of what IETF wishes or pronounces. Did NAT in IPv4 require an RFC before there were adoptions of it?
I would think the wiser course for IETF, rather then to attempt to control peoples behavior...something which it cannot do in practicality.... would be to recognize when there is a legitimate demand for some function/technology....and provide some guidance/standards about how that functionality can be implemented...so that there is a higher level of predictability about how individual implementations of such functionality would work. I a remain entirely unconvinced that NAT cannot "work well". It is quite widely deployed currently on the IPv4 net....and the internet has not ground to a halt because of it. Nothing about the basic purpose and usage of the internet changes just because we switch to IPv6 (if it does then the protocol is poorly conceived and designed), merely some of the details of the method used to achieve those ends. "Abstraction" and limits to reachability are important end goals for many organizations today, they will continue to be so tomorrow. IETF can either accept that or stick it's head in the sand and whistle while the rest of the world goes on doing what it wants to anyway. Personally, I'd rather have standards...so when all those implementations of NAT DO break some designers shiny new protocol...he can at least have some level of predictability about HOW they are doing so. Christopher Engel > -----Original Message----- > From: Keith Moore [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 12:22 PM > To: Chris Engel > Cc: 'Fred Baker'; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [SPAM] - Re: [nat66] Terminology: Definition for > "IPv6 Realm"? - Email has different SMTP TO: and MIME TO: > fields in the email addresses > > > On 4/30/10 11:12 AM, Chris Engel wrote: > > You WILL have Realms (I believe even very similar to > those described in RFC 2663) in IPv6. > > > Perhaps, but it's irresponsible for IETF to encourage them. > And there is such a thing as a self-fulfilling prophecy. By > planning for realms in IPv6 we would be helping to bring them about. > > People are going to make poor choices here and there, and > sometimes widely. IETF's job is to specify what will work > well, not to specify how to do things that can't be made to > work well. > > Keith > > > _______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
