Re: Application protocols and Address Translation

Carl Ford wrote:
> 
> One aspect of this to be discussed is the ease of use of getting the IP
> addresses.  Nats have a simple plug and play value that is a counter-balance
> to getting IP addresses allocated. Particularly when most folks have used the
> ISP for this function.

That's exactly why the model (and the registry policy) is that what
ISPs should give to subscribers is a *prefix* not an address,
with /48 being the preferred prefix length and /64 the second-best.

IMHO, the IETF community's job should be to make applications that 
run better with a good supply of addresses and without NAT. Beyond
that we get into economic or regulatory questions, where the IETF
can't play.

   Brian

Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2002 07:19:53 UTC