<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Enough addresses?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.icann.org/2007/10/enough-addresses/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.icann.org/2007/10/enough-addresses/</link>
	<description>Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 01:42:27 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Leo Vegoda</title>
		<link>http://blog.icann.org/2007/10/enough-addresses/comment-page-1/#comment-4891</link>
		<dc:creator>Leo Vegoda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 09:35:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.icann.org/?p=204#comment-4891</guid>
		<description>Joseph,

I could do that, although if I was going to try and convince the owner to change the configuration I should probably ask for a unique address (or block of addresses). 

Things mostly work at the moment. But if my needs change there is no guarantee that my landlord&#039;s NAT will support whatever new protocols I want to use. I&#039;m not sure that I want to try and convince my landlord to buy a new NAT box when I want to start doing something his current NAT box breaks.

Unique addressing avoids a potentially Sisyphean escalation between new protocols and the NATs that need to support them.

Leo</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Joseph,</p>
<p>I could do that, although if I was going to try and convince the owner to change the configuration I should probably ask for a unique address (or block of addresses). </p>
<p>Things mostly work at the moment. But if my needs change there is no guarantee that my landlord&#8217;s NAT will support whatever new protocols I want to use. I&#8217;m not sure that I want to try and convince my landlord to buy a new NAT box when I want to start doing something his current NAT box breaks.</p>
<p>Unique addressing avoids a potentially Sisyphean escalation between new protocols and the NATs that need to support them.</p>
<p>Leo</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joseph</title>
		<link>http://blog.icann.org/2007/10/enough-addresses/comment-page-1/#comment-4845</link>
		<dc:creator>Joseph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Oct 2007 02:16:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.icann.org/?p=204#comment-4845</guid>
		<description>Why can&#039;t you simply ask your apartment owner to assin you multiple RFC 1918 addresses?

Hence you will avoid double NAT, as you can satisfy all your IP address needs with the single NAT from your apartment owner.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why can&#8217;t you simply ask your apartment owner to assin you multiple RFC 1918 addresses?</p>
<p>Hence you will avoid double NAT, as you can satisfy all your IP address needs with the single NAT from your apartment owner.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

