the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?

William Pitcock nenolod at
Wed Apr 28 17:06:57 CDT 2010

On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 14:54 -0700, David Conrad wrote:
> On Apr 28, 2010, at 2:38 PM, Carl Rosevear wrote:
> > I don't understand why anyone thinks NAT should be a fundamental part of the v6 internet 
> Perhaps the ability to change service providers without having to renumber?

DHCPv6 solves that issue if implemented correctly in the CPE
firewall/router appliance.


More information about the NANOG mailing list