On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 23:42 +0000, Brez Borland wrote: > Dale has a point. I was impressed watching talk dedicated to ipv6 > where major minds behind ipv6 development seemed to be straight > ignorant, or least interested, in the notion of private network > implementations such as NAT. their position is that every device > should have a public IP. Which in my opinion would be great yes. But > NAT is the concept which has many uses as well, and I believe it is > not going to go away very soon. some academics are just weird I guess.
It is a double-edged sword. The development of the Internet has been dominated by academic types who have strong ideals that are often unrealistic. But on the other hand, the success of the Internet often results from these unrealistic ideals. (The main one being the "end-to-end principle".) Successful implementation often means producing good solutions that simultaneously (nearly) adhere to contradictory requirements. > Hopefully we come to IPv6 sometime soon. At the latest IETF meeting (in Hiroshima), the meeting hotel Internet services all had global IPv6 routing. Dale _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
