RE: ocean: do not boil

["Hesham Soliman (EAB)" <hesham.soliman@era.ericsson.se>]

  > >   > >   > p2p applications can be designed to use intermediaries,
  > >   > >   > just like SMTP and HTTP. If I was designing an apps
  > >   > >   > protocol today, I would definitely make sure it could
  > >   > >   > be relayed between address spaces at applications level.
  > >   > >
  > >   > >=> Are we in a position to mandate this?
  > >   >
  > >   > We're not in a position to _mandate_ anything.  
  > However, we are
  > >   > in a position to make recommendations about the best 
  > way to resolve
  > >   > certain scenarios.
  > > 
  > > => I'm not trying to be -ve, but unless we mandate
  > > that all applications will use this model, or alternatively
  > > assume that HTTP and SMTP are the only important applications
  > > for the medium term there is no point eliminating the
  > > v6 -> v4 scenarios.
  > 
  > I didn't suggest eliminating them. But since they will be even worse
  > to manage than IPv4 NAT, we should use them only when forced to.

=> I fully agree that this is something that should
only be used/deployed if people are forced to do
it. Translators in general are not pretty and don't
make life simpler, but are necessary sometimes. 
What I'm not sure about is whether running a dual
network containing IPv6 (global) and IPv4 private addresses
is simpler than just running an IPv6 network with 
v6 <=> v4 translators. 

Hesham