RE: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)

To: "Keith Moore" <moore at cs.utk.edu>, <alh-ietf at tndh.net>
Subject: RE: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)
From: "Christian Huitema" <huitema at windows.microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 17:48:44 -0800
Cc: <mrw at windriver.com>, <ietf at ietf.org>
Sender: owner-ietf at ietf.org
Thread-index: AcL0u6gV9v07RXF3TUaUxF0jOPIRNQAD/+Ow
Thread-topic: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)

 > > You are mixing cause and effect. In IPv4 the vast majority of nodes
> > are limited to a single address at a time.
> 
> Well, I don't know about windows boxes, but real operating systems
have
> supported virtual hosting in IPv4 for many years.  Having multiple
> addresses on a node, even a node with a single network interface, is
> nothing new.

My Windows-XP laptop currently has 14 IPv6 addresses, and 2 IPv4
addresses. The sky is not falling.

-- Christian Huitema

Follow-Ups:
- Re: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)
  - From: Tim Chown

Prev by Date: RE: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)
Next by Date: Re: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)
Previous by thread: U.S. DOD to Select the French GSM over CDMA ?
Next by thread: Re: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

RE: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.