Subject: Re: "unique enough" [RE: globally unique site local addresses]

From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 12:49:50 +0100

>> The <insert letter>GUPI model will drive the development of NATs.
>
> that's just nuts.  GUPIs don't encourage NATs any more than any other
> aspect of IPv6.

It depends...

>
> I'm beginning to think that citing NATs as a reason for not doing
> something in IPv6 is like comparing someone to Hitler in a political
> discussion - it's such an extreme statement that it can't be evaluated.
>

Let me clarify what I meant to say. I do think that we need a 
functional equivalent of todays PI addresses. If we make these 
"special" in any way, so that they be either a dedicated address block 
or we impose the restriction that these should not be routable, someone 
will come up with a translation device from globally routable addresses 
to the PI equivalent. Now, we can all think what we want of NATs, my 
experience as a network operator (in the ISP sense) is that it will 
create problems on the application layer - just as we are experiencing 
today.

- kurtis -

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 12:49:50 +0100

It depends...

- kurtis -