[address-policy-wg] Mandating NAT toward the final /8

Hi,

Masataka Ohta schrieb:
[...not quoting the meaningless stuff for a reason...]

waering all my hats as private internet citizen, network operator for my 
own network, network architect for a non-commerial organisation 
supporting new technologies, LIR, ISP, and IT Consultant for big to 
large customers, i hearby state that i ...

a) have operational IPv6 networks for 6 years now
b) don't like NAT
c) don't need NAT
d) don't use NAT
e) don't sell NAT if not a requirement by a customer
f) don't see a reason to conserve IPv4 space
g) don't see a reason not to migrate to IPv6
h) don't see a reason to handle the last IPv4 /8 any different and add 
more complexity policy-wise here
i) don't support any more complex NAT setup than we already have in the 
wild now
j) ..get bored by this now and stop here even though i might come up 
with more points


...just my 0.02EUR

[yes i know, this is a destructive, polemic statement, but it fits the 
tone of the original suggestion somehow...]

-- 
========================================================================
= Sascha Lenz                  SLZ-RIPE          slz at baycix.de         =
= Network Design & Operations                                          =
= BayCIX GmbH, Landshut                  * PGP public Key on demand *  =
========================================================================