Re: To address or NAT to address?

[Steve Deering]

At 8:27 AM -0800 12/2/99, Yakov Rekhter wrote:
>With this in mind I hope that the same folks who complained about
>increased dependencies on DNS by NATs, would be equally vocal in
>complaining about increased reliance on the DNS by IPv6 (which claimed
>to be an improvement over NATs).

Yakov,

Observing that IPv6 has increased reliance on DNS, as does NAT, would
not invalidate claims that IPv6 is an improvement over NAT; the claimed
improvement is not solely, or even primarily, one of reduced DNS reliance.

(Since you brought it up, I'll pedantically point out that IPv6 does
not rely on the DNS at all -- it works just fine in the absence of a DNS
service, unlike some of the NAT variants and the direction in which NAT apparently 
must evolve to keep up with the growth and functional demands
of the Internet.)

Steve