I liked Tony Hain's suggestion that the future IETF terminal room/
wireless LAN ntworks should offer NATted IPv4 and plain IPv6, to
better reflect the choices available to much of the world.
i wish i could agree that they are, but the transition plan seems to
have a lot of nats in it. sigh
Matt Crawford writes:
| I liked Tony Hain's suggestion that the future IETF terminal room/
| wireless LAN ntworks should offer NATted IPv4 and plain IPv6, to
| better reflect the choices available to much of the world. But I
| don't think that puts the two on an equal footing, so in addition
|
- Original Message -
From: Matt Crawford [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 3:42 AM
Subject: Making the IETF meeting network more representative of the real
world
I liked Tony Hain's suggestion that the future IETF terminal room/
wireless LAN
At 05:41 AM 8/9/2001, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
I liked Tony Hain's suggestion that the future IETF terminal room/
wireless LAN ntworks should offer NATted IPv4 and plain IPv6, to
better reflect the choices available to much of the world.
i wish i could agree that they are, but the
At 08:14 AM 8/9/2001, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
For many or most of us, it's not a matter of our preparation. Rather it is
the matter of infrastructure support for IPv6. Until our corporate and ISP
and operating system and application infrastructures support IPv6, we
unfortunately must
Bill Manning wrote:
In the always on Internet, 05:00 is just as
problematic as 11:00 or 17:00. To really test the
viability of NAT/renumbering, it should be done
when there is a load.
No argument, I was just trying to recognize that many people
here have
Keith Moore wrote:
... imposing NATs on the IETF network would limit the
capability of the network to support such tests.
Obviously you missed the point that native IPv6 would be available.
Why would we want to support any further development of IPv4 only
apps?
Tony
