bicknell at ufp.org
Mon May 9 20:57:20 EDT 2005
In a message written on Mon, May 09, 2005 at 02:08:33PM -0700, Tony Hain wrote:
> The point is that IPv4/nat has constrained innovation; that IPv6 as defined
> opens the potential again; and anyone that claims to know what we will or
> will not need in 50 years is just wrong. Yes egregious waste of the address
> resource should be avoided, but so should miserly conservation that
> increases the market value of nat approaches. The /48-/64 units effectively
> reduce the market value of nat to $0. Artificially constraining the space
> available to network users will only negate that effect.
You did not say this directly, so I will ask directly.
Am I correct in assuming that you believe 32 bits of host space (4
billion hosts per subnet) is a constraint that qualifies as "miserly",
and that will lead to the adoption of IPv6 NAT?
Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ARIN-PPML