Re: [v6ops] Thoughts about wider operational input

[[e-mail]]

> ONLY if you start from the premise that NAT is not in fundamental conflict with IP basics - namely that “packets can be routed from any end point to any other end point” (with the modern security proviso of “subject to administrative policies”.)
> In any case, I’m used to configuring a firewall anyway. Most CE devices come with a stateful firewall installed and configured - most of them even with sensible defaults !

My views on this has evolved over the last couple of decades.
I have come to believe that freedom to rewrite the locator at various network edges is an important property of IP.
NAT is a somewhat unfortunate implementation of a locator / identifier split. But we have tried many others 8+8, LISP, ILNP...
The need for protecting your network against global address changes in smaller networks, or providing a service abstraction (VIP) in DCs. Or making your network appear like a host for permissionless extensions of the network are valid use cases, regardless of version of the IP protocol.

O.