Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 15:51:20 -0500 (EST) From: Scott Bradner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | if it were easy to show this we would not be discussing the topic | I don't know many companies who decide to do "*astonishingly* | expensive" things if there are cheaper options Aside from Matt's reply (seems cheap, at the start), with IPv4 there aren't always cheaper options. One of the early remarks on this topic was Yakov's (paraphrased) "people will still do NAT with IPv6". There the cheaper options will exist (or should exist). kre
- RE: IP network address assignments/alloca... Josh Duffek
- RE: IP network address assignments/alloca... Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: IP network address assignments/allocation... Keith Moore
- RE: IP network address assignments/allocations inf... Ian King
- RE: IP network address assignments/allocation... Matt Holdrege
- Re: IP network address assignments/allocation... Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IP network address assignments/alloca... Randy Bush
- Re: IP network address assignments/al... Perry E. Metzger
- Re: IP network address assignments/allocations inf... Scott Bradner
- Re: IP network address assignments/allocation... Matt Crawford
- Re: IP network address assignments/allocation... Robert Elz
- Re: IP network address assignments/allocations inf... Jeffrey Altman
- Re: IP network address assignments/allocations inf... J. Noel Chiappa
- Re: IP network address assignments/allocation... Kim Hubbard
- Re: IP network address assignments/alloca... Rick H Wesson
- Re: IP network address assignments/al... Randy Bush
- Re: IP network address assignment... Rick H Wesson
- Re: IP network address assig... Kim Hubbard
- Re: IP network address assig... Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IP network address assignments/allocations inf... Sean Doran
- Re: IP network address assignments/allocation... Brian E Carpenter