<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Alex Carver <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:agcarver+ale@acarver.net" target="_blank">agcarver+ale@acarver.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi everyone,<br>
<br>
Got a "plan ahead" question for you. I've got a handful of<br>
firmware-based devices that are IPv4-only never to be made IPv6 capable<br>
(PLCs, some print servers, data loggers, etc.)<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This may not affect you, and just an FYI, but...you mention AT&T later, so be aware that at least with U-Verse, they have said that LANs (on uVerse) can no longer use the <a href="http://10.0.0.0/8">10.0.0.0/8</a> addresses. There is rumor that this is due to AT&T moving to a corporate wide NAT where their whole network is going to be behind a NAT, and that your AT&T modem/router is going to be given a 10.*.*.* address in that space. This is supposed to happen 6-Jul.</div>
<div><br></div><div>The other rumor is that you can have an externally visible IP4 IP for an additional $15/mo. I don't know how this works with existing static IP users, and personally I've subscribed to a third party VPN provider through which I can forward ports back to my machine so I can have an externally visible machine, since I do run services that I need to get to from outside AT&T's network.</div>
<div><br></div><div>So, now we wait. I'm not a network guy, so I assume there's a way to segregate your LAN from theirs even if they do this, but people here smarter than I can debate the feasibility and wisdom of doing so =)</div>
<div><br></div></div>