Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?

Cutler James R james.cutler at consultant.com
Wed Apr 21 12:57:00 CDT 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

More information about the NANOG mailing list