There must be something similar to Godwin's Law whereby any IETF discussion can devolve into a debate over NAT. ;-)
Jason On 7/12/13 10:13 AM, "Phillip Hallam-Baker" <hal...@gmail.com<mailto:hal...@gmail.com>> wrote: Keith, read my words, I choose them more carefully than you imagine. solves their problems at negligible cost TO THEM What part of that do you disagree with? I don't dispute the fact that NAT is a suboptimal solution if we look at the system as a whole. But the reason I deployed NAT in my house was that Roadrunner wanted $10 extra per month for every device I connected to a maximum of 4. I have over 200 IP enabled devices in my house.
