Re: quietly....

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Feb 4, 2011, at 6:23 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:

> ---- Original Message -----
> > From: "Brian Johnson" <bjohnson () drtel com>
>
> > This is exactly the problem we have. Some people have no perspective
> > on what the Internet is and it's real power. I've met too many people
> > who claim to be "in the know" on these topics that don't understand
> > that NAT was designed for address preservation. That was the
> > only/primary/driving real reason for its development. The other
> > "features" were side effects and are not intended to be solutions to
> > production issues.
>
> "[were] not intended to be solutions to production issues" !=
> "are not being depended on now".
>
> > If I use a wrench to hammer nails, it may work fine, but when It comes
> > to certain nails it may have issues. I'm using the tool for the wrong
> > purpose. This is the folly of NAT.
>
> Perhaps.  But that's not important, now.
>
> Cheers,
> -- jr 'Good luck.  We're all counting on you' a

True. It's also a backwards version of the analogy.

The IPv4 situation today is that we have very few screws and we use NAT as
a hammer to pound in small brads in places where we need screws because
they are the only fastener we have left.

What is important with IPv6 is to teach the generation of hammer-wielding
mechanics who have grown up rarely seeing a screw and never knowing
that there were wrenches that there are new tools available in IPv6.
That screws or nuts and bolts can usually be superior to nails. That screws,
nuts, and bolts work better if you install them with a screw driver or a wrench.
That small brads lack structural integrity and that lag screws or bolts provide
a superior structural hold when installed properly. That attempting to hammer
every screw into a NAT-hole will destroy both the screw and the NAT-hole in
most cases.

Owen