>You do not consider IPv6 an option? ipv6 is working just fine even here at IETF49 venue, it's so much more convenient than IPv4, for couple of reasons. - DHCPv4 lease time is set to 10 minutes, and we keep changing IPv4 address. if I suspend my laptop, go to bathroom and resume, i'll have to reconnect all of IPv4 TCP sessions I had. we do not have the problem with IPv6. - we have no problem reaching IPv4 world with IPv6, we have IPv6-to- IPv4 translator here (http://www.kame.net/ietf49/). so, migrate to IPv6. you will be happier. itojun
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Michael W. Condry
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Dennis Glatting
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Jon Crowcroft
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Fred Baker
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Scott Brim
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Keith Moore
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Tony Dal Santo
- RE: NATs *ARE* evil! Iliff, Tina
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! itojun
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Dennis Glatting
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! James Aldridge
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Geoff Huston
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Frank Solensky
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Brian E Carpenter
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Frank Solensky
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Brian E Carpenter
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! David W. Morris
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Keith Moore
- Re: NATs *ARE* evil! Masataka Ohta