On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 14:17, Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net> wrote:
If you have more experience (not including rumors) that suggests otherwise, I'd very much like to hear about it. I'm open to the possibility that NAT444 breaks stuff - that feels right in my gut - but I haven't found any valid evidence of this.
In case you have not already found this: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-donley-nat444-impacts-01 Cheers, ~Chris
Regardless, I think we can agree that IPv6 is the way to avoid NAT-related growing pains. We've known this for a long time.
Cheers, -Benson
_______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact info@arin.net if you experience any issues.
-- @ChrisGrundemann weblog.chrisgrundemann.com www.burningwiththebush.com www.theIPv6experts.net www.coisoc.org