Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?

Wed Apr 21 17:57:00 UTC 2010

No.  You get a different set of problems, mostly administrative.

On Apr 21, 2010, at 1:53 PM, Dave Sparro wrote:

> On 4/21/2010 8:46 AM, Jim Burwell wrote:
>> 
>> Despite it doing the job it was intended to do, I've always seen NAT
>> as a bit of an ugly hack, with potential to get even uglier with LSN
>> and multi-level NAT in the future.  I personally welcome a return to a
>> NAT-less world with IPv6.  :)
>>   
> 
> Don't you get all of the same problems when there is a properly restrictive SPI firewall at both ends of the connection regardless of weather NAT is used as well.
> 

James R. Cutler
james.cutler at consultant.com