brandon.galbraith at gmail.com
Wed Feb 18 02:27:44 UTC 2009
On 2/17/09, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:
> > I find it a shame that NAT-PT has become depreciated
> the ietf has recanted and is hurriedly trying to get this back on
> track. of course, to save face, the name has to be changed.
> > with people talking about carrier grade NATS I think combining
> > these with NAT-PT could help with the transition
> cgn is not a transition tool. it is a dangerous hack to deal with
> the problems of a few very large consumer isps who lack sufficient
> space to number their customer edge.
Sounds like those consumer ISPs better get started on rolling out dual
stacks to the CPE.
Email: brandon.galbraith at gmail.com
More information about the NANOG