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

Thu Apr 29 04:36:24 UTC 2010

On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:54:04 PDT, David Conrad said:
> 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?

RFC4193 or PI address space, depending what problem you're trying to solve
by not renumbering.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 227 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20100429/51bd99e0/attachment.sig>