[ppml] IPv6>>32
bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
Thu May 12 20:02:08 EDT 2005
- Previous message: [ppml] IPv6>>32
- Next message: [ppml] IPv6>>32
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, May 12, 2005 at 06:11:17PM -0400, Kevin Loch wrote: > bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > >>This is more about static vs dynamic than it is about single ip vs > >>subnet. They already know everyone is using NAT so it's not about > >>the number of users supported. > > > > any studies to back up that assertion kevin? > > http://www.webactivemagazine.co.uk/news/1161694 > http://www.gigaom.com/2005/04/13/us-broadband-subscribers-57-million-in-2008/ > > Nat boxes are extremely common in the residential market. > > - Kevin so... you are asserting "extremely common" == "everyone"... i, for one, am unwilling to make that leap of faith. the NAT-capable boxes at my house have NAT turned off. the NAT-mandatory boxes I have purchased (and no doubt recorded as units sold) have been relegated to the e-waste bin.... so as long as I am not using NAT (agressively at this point in time) your statement that "everyone" is using NAT is demonstrably false. --bill
- Previous message: [ppml] IPv6>>32
- Next message: [ppml] IPv6>>32
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list