NAT444 or ?

Leigh Porter leigh.porter at
Wed Sep 7 10:31:40 UTC 2011

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy at]
> Sent: 07 September 2011 11:18
> To: Leigh Porter
> Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
> Subject: Re: NAT444 or ?
> > I'm going to have to deploy NAT444 with dual-stack real soon now.
> you may want to review the presentations from last week's apnic meeting
> in busan.  real mesurements.  sufficiently scary that people who were
> heavily pushing nat444 for the last two years suddenly started to say
> "it was not me who pushed nat444, it was him!"  as if none of us had a
> memory.
> randy

Thankyou, I'm watching it now, but I am under no illusion that it will work well. NAT44 is bad enough.


This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit 

More information about the NANOG mailing list