I see a lot of talk about IPv6 `fixing` NAT issues, with NATS existing only because of an address shortage.
There are a lot of people, who want the layer of seperation provided by NATS, and in fact I plan to run an IPV6 NAT. Anyone find this a strange suggestion that NAT's are just something to fix a simple problem, and not what I think many people use them for?
JAOO 2007: Joe Armstrong - On Erlang, OO, Concurrency, Shared State and the Future, Part 2
Oct 31, 2007 at 7:29 AMErlang in telcom...
Michael Surkan: Introduction to IPV6
Nov 16, 2006 at 10:44 AMThere are a lot of people, who want the layer of seperation provided by NATS, and in fact I plan to run an IPV6 NAT. Anyone find this a strange suggestion that NAT's are just something to fix a simple problem, and not what I think many people use them for?