Which is a problem if we are reliant on the telco's to move to IPv6. Why would any sane [NZ] telco spend serious money changing to a technology which further relegates them to a common bit pusher? There is an argument here that IPv4 exhaustion provides a technical rational for telcos to provide walled garden, proxy-style services.
I fully support this style of thinking. Infact, if I was an ISP I would be seriously considering NATing my entire customer base - except for those who were willing to pay $x/mo for a real IP. At the end of the day, with a few exceptions, most protocols work quite well from behind a nat. And it gives me another revenue stream, which if I am an ISP would be quite useful considering I am probably losing money on the DSL I am currently providing. Cheers, Patrick -- patpatnz(a)gmail.com