Re: myth of the great transition (was US Defense Department forma lly adopts IPv6)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: myth of the great transition (was US Defense Department forma lly adopts IPv6)
on 6/18/2003 5:37 PM Keith Moore wrote:
> you're simply wrong about that, at least for anything resembling
> today's NATs. except for a shortage of IPv4 addresses, NATs would not
> be needed at all.
...and a routing grid that could handle a squared table size. No use in
opening allocations to everybody that can justify ~/29 if filters are
still going to be dropping everything after /20.
--
Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions
of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.
