Re: [xml-dev] 2007 Predictions (probably OT!)

["Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@tech-know-ware.com>]

Original Message From: "Rick Marshall"
> Pete Cordell wrote:
>> Re: IPv4 vs. IPv6: It seems that a lot of IETF protocol design now 
>> grudgingly acknowledges the presence of NATs.  There may now even be less 
>> pressure to deploy IPv6 than there was earlier!!!!  (If the ...

> NAT is not a good solution for VOIP and other point-to-point technology. 
> And indeed things like msn and skype that use central servers to overcome 
> the NAT problem also, by definition, lead to an unnecessary increase in 
> required internet bandwidth.

Indeed true.  But even in that space the mood seems to have changed from "we 
need IPv6 to fix this and it will be along soon.", to "IPv6 would be nice, 
but in the mean time we're going to work around it."

Some NATs are easier to work around than others.  And Internet bandwidth is 
probably an even less important issue than the cost of memory these days!

This reduces the pressure to deploy IPv6.

My advice for 2007 is that, if your plans are predicated on ubiquitous IPv6 
you'd better check out the jobs pages!

Pete.
--
=============================================
Pete Cordell
Tech-Know-Ware Ltd
for XML to C++ data binding visit
http://www.tech-know-ware.com/lmx
(or http://www.xml2cpp.com)
=============================================