Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity

[Keith Moore <moore at cs.utk.edu>]

>> NAT-PT (RFC 2766) is being moved to Historic status. RFC 3142 is 
>> Informational. Without a standards-track method for people to use 
>> IPv4, changing a production network to IPv6 seems unwise.
>>     
>
> 	RFC status does not have direct connection with "being implemented" or
> 	"being deployed" (see all the W3C standards which did not originate
> 	in IETF).
>
> 	at N+I tokyo we have been using RFC2766/3142 for IPv6-only net cafe
> 	since around year 2000 or something.  in June 2007 N+I network team
> 	used Windows Vista official releases as the clients.
>   

NAT-PT really needs to be wiped off the face of the earth.  It provides
all of the disadvantages of IPv4+NAT with all of the transition costs of
IPv6.  If there is ever any significant penetration of NAT-PT, then the
pseudo-IPv6 network will not be able to support any more kinds of
applications than the NATted IPv4 does today.

Keith


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf