RE: ocean: do not boil

["Bound, Jim" <Jim.Bound@hp.com>]

every input I get is that they don't want NAT and want it to go away as soon as possible.  for "some" (I say some) I am being told how fast can I get rid of IPv4 period at least on my site.  that "some" is as important as the Lowest Common Denominator or one size fits all view to me as an engineer.

/jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: itojun@iijlab.net [mailto:itojun@iijlab.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 11:36 PM
> To: Stewart Tansley
> Cc: Bound, Jim; v6ops@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: ocean: do not boil 
> 
> 
> >> 	in almost all of the installation of IPv6, they run 
> IPv4 and IPv6 in
> >> 	parallel - usually IPv4 is NATed, and IPv6 is globally reachable
> >> 	(sometimes IPv6 filtering device is in place).  i don't 
> share your
> >> 	view on this aspect on customer demand.
> >Is it demand, or is it necessity.
> 
> 	i should have written "in almost all of the 
> installation I'VE SEEN".
> 	so it's an input from real experiences.  and since Jim 
> is talking about
> 	customer demand, i think i was talking about customer 
> demand too.
> 	(and normally it's simpler to leave NAT'ed IPv4 as is - 
> don't touch it
> 	if it's running)
> 
> itojun
>