![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 15:51:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Scott Bradner <sob at harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <199912072051.PAA23022 at newdev.harvard.edu>
| if it were easy to show this we would not be discussing the topic
| I don't know many companies who decide to do "*astonishingly*
| expensive" things if there are cheaper options
Aside from Matt's reply (seems cheap, at the start), with IPv4 there
aren't always cheaper options. One of the early remarks on this
topic was Yakov's (paraphrased) "people will still do NAT with IPv6".
There the cheaper options will exist (or should exist).
kre
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.