Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb at cs.columbia.edu>]

On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 05:04:54 -0400
Keith Moore <moore at cs.utk.edu> wrote:

> 
> >> I'm not sure what your point is -- I took Keith's comment to mean
> >> that home NATs with v6 were completely unacceptable.
> >
> >
> > /64's do NOT imply that there's NAT functionality involved, just
> > that there's
> > a single subnet, yes?
> yes, but it's unreasonable to expect a home user to not need to
> subnet. particularly when there are so many different media
> competing for the home network space....it would be reasonable to
> have a subnet for each medium.
> 
> 
I originally agreed with you on that.  However, given modern switches,
I'm not nearly as convinced.


		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb

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