Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures)

[Javier J <javier () advancedmachines us>]

I've had an IPV6 tunnel from Hurricane Electric for 10+ years I think.
IPv4 will probably live as it does now in my network, mostly for management
/ interserver coms for legacy hardware/software that doesn't support ipv6.


On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 5:31 PM <borg () uu3 net> wrote:

> Oh, sorry to disappoint you, but they are not missing anything..
> Internet become a consumer product where data is provided by
> large corporations similary to TV now. Your avarage Joe consumer
> does NOT care about NAT and that he cant run services or he does NOT
> have full e2e communication.
>
> Yes, you are right, NAT was a second class internet for a while but
> now it seems that we cannot live without it anymore :)
> I dont really see other way how I can connect LAN to internet now.
> Using public IPs? Thats so terrible idea. How can I be el-cheappo
> dual-homed then?
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
>
> From: Mark Andrews <marka () isc org>
> To: Andy Ringsmuth <andy () andyring com>
> Cc: Grant Taylor via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
> Subject: Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures)
> Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2021 08:00:38 +1100
>
> There are more smart phones in use in the world today the world than can
> be
> addressed by IPv4. Complaining about lack of IPv6 deployment has been
> legitimate for a long time. Telcos shouldn˙˙t have to deploy NATs. Homes
> shouldn˙˙t have to deploy NATs. Businesses shouldn˙˙t have to deploy NATs.
>
> NATs produce a second class Internet.  We have had to lived with a second
> class Internet for so long that most don˙˙t know what they are missing. --
> Mark Andrews