Re: [arin-ppml] NAT444 rumors (was Re: Looking for an IPv6 naysayer...)

[Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann () gmail com>]

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