Re: moving to IPv6

["Jay R. Ashworth" <jra () scfn thpl lib fl us>]

On Mon, Nov 03, 1997 at 12:01:33PM -0500, Sean M. Doran wrote:
> Phil Howard <phil () charon milepost com> writes:
> > Test market a dialup service at a reduced rate that gives people a
> > private space address behind a proxy server.
>
> No, implement NAT in such a way that you can roll this
> service out without anyone noticing, except in the
> difficult case where an "inside" and "outside" address
> collision is triggered by using IP addresses rather than
> DNS names.
>
> Then once you've rolled it out, you can assign static IP
> addresses, large address ranges, and other popular
> shopping-list items that a number of users seem to want,
> to the extent that they are a market differentiator that
> in the absence of NAT favours less-conserving ISPs.

Large address ranges, yes.  But the people who want static addresses,
by and large, want them precisely _because_ they are routable and
visible.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Cheers,
- -jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra () baylink com
Member of the Technical Staff             Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued
The Suncoast Freenet      "Pedantry.  It's not just a job, it's an
Tampa Bay, Florida          adventure."  -- someone on AFU      +1 813 790 7592