W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-discuss@w3.org > December 2002

Re: Application protocols and Address Translation

From: Clive D.W. Feather <clive@demon.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:12:05 +0000
To: Tony Hansen <tony@att.com>
Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.org
Message-ID: <20021202171204.GA97368@demon.net>

Tony Hansen said:
> The major problem I see is the desire of ISPs to only allow one IP 
> address to be grabbed per connection to the ISP.
[...]
> As long as ISPs continue to work under this pretext, it won't matter if 
> they're handing out IPv4 #'s or IPv6 #'s -- they'll still only want to 
> hand out a single IP address, and people are going to continue to use 
> NAT in some form to get around the problem.
> 
> I think we need some incentive for them to hand out IPv6 addresses in 
> chunks of /24 or larger. I don't know what such an incentive would be.

Why /24, for goodness sake? Surely /64 is big enough for any organisation
that's going to be connecting through this kind of ISP?

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <clive@demon.net>   | Tel:  +44 20 8371 1138
Internet Expert     | Home:  <clive@davros.org>  | Fax:  +44 870 051 9937
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
Thus plc            |                            |
Received on Monday, 2 December 2002 12:14:33 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tuesday, 24 February 2004 19:46:24 EST