NAT444 or ?
leigh.porter at ukbroadband.com
Wed Sep 7 10:31:40 UTC 2011
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy at psg.com]
> 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
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 http://www.messagelabs.com/email
More information about the NANOG