owen at delong.com
Tue Feb 1 15:34:34 CST 2011
On Feb 1, 2011, at 12:08 PM, david raistrick wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2011, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
>> What's the point of switching to IPv6 if it repeats all the IPv4 mistakes only with bigger addresses?
>> If you like NAT IPv4 is the place to be, it'll only get more and more.
> It's argument like this that has lead to this moment. Instead of discussing "how can the next generation addressing scheme support the needs of Internet consumers today and tomorrow" we tell people "if you don't like it, use v4"
> Guess what? We're still using v4.
Enjoy that. Let's see how that goes in 5-7 years.
If you're determined to destroy IPv6 by bringing the problems of NAT forward with you, then, I'm fine with you remaining in your IPv4 island. I'm willing to bet that most organizations will embrace an internet unencumbered by the brokenness that is NAT and move forward. I do not think that lack of NAT has been a significant barrier to IPv6 adoption, nor do I think it will be.
More information about the NANOG