Subject: Re: IP network address assignments/allocations information?

From: "J. Noel Chiappa" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 16:12:06 -0500

Everyone, this conversation isn't really going to be very productive. The
people who like A aren't about to start liking B, and vice versa. (And then
there are the people who don't like either - but they aren't going to change
their minds either! :-) So discussion on this point is not going to be very
productive.
	
The various approaches to growing the Internet (IPv6, NAT's, etc) all have
costs and benefits - but each differing costs and benefits. In a system as
large as the Internet, it is to be expected that some people will evaluate
the costs and benefits, and decide that for their particular situation,
option A is to be preferred. Others will prefer option B.

In the end, if a single approach does become the predominant one, it will be
the market that decides (as individuals look at the costs and benefits in
their individual cases), not the IETF. The IETF can't do a lot to influence
this outcome - we don't have a police force, nor an army, so we can't stop
someone from using A, or force them to use B.

The IETF has always done much better at *designing* protocols than it has
done at *choosing* protocols. Let's stick to designing, and stop arguing
about which one to pick, eh?

	Noel

---

From: Jon Crowcroft <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 08:37:26 +0000

In message <[email-masked]>, "J. Noel Chiappa" typed:

 >>costs and benefits -

yes, but propviders don't actually ASK the users what the COST is of a
NAT

the BT ADSL trial in london uses NATs and all the folks i know who are
what BT might call "advanced" users (i.e. people who want to export
files on web servers, use multicast apps etc), find it a
REAL PAIN in the backside
comapred to their old school/university 'always on' access

but at no point in any of the market research on the trial users did
the provider bother asking about this, so they remain clueless....as
do many NAT Proponents.

 cheers

   jon

---

From: Jon Crowcroft <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 08:37:26 +0000

cheers

   jon