1 |
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:22:39AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote |
2 |
|
3 |
> You are being over-simplistic. |
4 |
> |
5 |
> Lack of IPv4 address space *caused* NAT to happen, the two are |
6 |
> inextricably intertwined. |
7 |
|
8 |
Agreed. But we shouldn't be pointing out that NAT has partially solved |
9 |
the problem, and giving people false hope that NAT will solve the |
10 |
shortage problem forever. We should be pounding away on the fact that |
11 |
we're running out of IP addresses... period... end of story. If people |
12 |
ask about NAT, then mention that the undersupply will be so bad that |
13 |
even NAT won't help. |
14 |
|
15 |
> Even worse, people now have NAT conflated with all sorts of other |
16 |
> things. Like for example NAT and security. |
17 |
|
18 |
That's why I wwant to avoid that propaganda battle. It's been lost |
19 |
already. Deal with it. Don't waste time and effort on it. Put your |
20 |
effort into pounding away on a simple issue that people do understand... |
21 |
we're running out of IP addresses. |
22 |
|
23 |
> NAT is the context of an IPv6 discussion is *very* relevant, it's |
24 |
> one of the points you have to raise to illustrate what bits inside |
25 |
> people's heads needs to be identified and changed. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> Until you change the content of people's heads, IPv6 is just not |
28 |
> going to happen. |
29 |
|
30 |
I disagree with you there. IPV6 adoption will be driven by shortage |
31 |
of addresses, which people can understand. It will not be accomplished |
32 |
by sermons about the evils of NAT whilst people's eyes glaze over. |
33 |
"A preachment, dear friends, you are about to receive, is on John |
34 |
Barleycorn, Nicotine, and the Temptations of NAT". |
35 |
|
36 |
And if it comes down to it, I'd much rather have IPV6 with IPV6 NAT |
37 |
being available, rather than no IPV6. |
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org> |
41 |
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications |