IPV6 renumbering painless?

Fri Nov 12 11:10:04 UTC 2004

On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 10:58 +0000, Michael.Dillon at radianz.com wrote:

> > Regardless of the merit of NAT, there is little merit in IPv6+NAT as it 
> > has all the downsides of both. If you can live with NAT, stay in IPv4 
> > and talk to the IPv6 world over IPv4<->IPv6 NAT.
> 
> Or upgrade to NAP (Network Architecture Protection) *grin*

That is actually exactly what should be told to any administrator that
asks for "IPv6 NAT":

"No, in IPv6 it is done differently, it is then called NAP, which is
waaay cooler and saves you a lot of money and troubles".

Greets,
 Jeroen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 240 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20041112/a90b32cf/attachment.sig>