<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Sure there was, ISPs were only giving out one IP address, they wanted to share their internet connection with more than one computer. Why did windows 98 introduce the internet connection sharing feature then? NAT was a feature customers wanted, IPv6 is not, because they don't know they need it. <div><br></div><div>If they can get youtube and there are workarounds implemented, people don't care. Moving forward we all need to understand this. <br><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>On 22/01/2010, at 12:17 PM, Curtis Bayne wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format --><p><font size="2">There was never a customer demand for NAT - it was just something that CPE vendors implemented because there was no other choice - it was in their best interests to do so for the contiguity of their product.<br>
<br>
This is no different.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Mark Newton [<a href="mailto:newton@internode.com.au">mailto:newton@internode.com.au</a>]<br>
Sent: Fri 1/22/2010 10:19 AM<br>
To: Curtis Bayne<br>
Cc: <a href="mailto:ausnog@lists.ausnog.net">ausnog@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Less than 10% of IPv4 Addresses Remain Unallocated<br>
<br>
<br>
On 22/01/2010, at 10:00 AM, Curtis Bayne wrote:<br>
<br>
> The technology required to implement v6 on the NBN is available TODAY.<br>
><br>
We have customers in our trial on FTTH networks today :)<br>
<br>
> You can start developing strategies around currently available hardware TODAY. You can draft a migration strategy TODAY. You can bring v6 into your core TODAY. There may be no consumer demand yet, but one day there will be: don't be caught with your pants down.<br>
><br>
<br>
Apart from CPE, another missing element is the CGN boxes we'll all need<br>
to keep IPv4 limping along.<br>
<br>
When you're talking to CPE vendors about missing v6 support, don't<br>
forget to keep banging on the major equipment vendors about the bits<br>
of the picture they aren't providing yet. It's tremendously irresponsible for<br>
the majors to spend the last 10 - 15 years in IETF working groups<br>
arguing about how IPv6 is supposed to work, then, when crunch time comes,<br>
innocently claim total ignorance about the timeframes and pretend that<br>
they've been completely blindsided by new IPv6 requirements.<br>
<br>
Vapourware doesn't cut it, and at this late stage any vendor who says, "There's<br>
no customer demand" should be LARTed from orbit. That's no longer an<br>
acceptable response to anything related to the Internet's IPv6 transition. <br>
<br>
<br>
- mark<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Mark Newton Email: <a href="mailto:newton@internode.com.au">newton@internode.com.au</a> (W)<br>
Network Engineer Email: <a href="mailto:newton@atdot.dotat.org">newton@atdot.dotat.org</a> (H)<br>
Internode Pty Ltd Desk: +61-8-82282999<br>
"Network Man" - Anagram of "Mark Newton" Mobile: +61-416-202-223<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
</p>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>AusNOG mailing list<br><a href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br><a href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></body></html>