[arin-ppml] Fantasyland

[bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com]

On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 12:03:29PM +0100, michael.dillon at bt.com wrote:
> > > Why shouldn't the company in question just deploy IPv6 and install 
> > > NAT-PT gateways to cover the next 2-3 years before
> > > IPv6 transit is widely available?
> 
> > 	Please provide a vendor list for NAT-PT gateways that
> > 	provide production level service/availability - today.
> 
> I would hope that the company in question would plan their deployment
> exercise and not just rush out buying equipment and blasting out their
> old network. As part of the planning exercise, they might go to the ARIN
> IPv6 wiki at <http://www.getipv6.info/index.php/Investigate_Middleboxes>
> where they will note vendor names. If they contact said vendors, then
> there is motivation for said vendors to provide production level service
> and availabilty within the timeframe for implementation. Note that there
> is also the possibility of consulting firms using open-source NAT-PT who
> would then provide the SLA and support component.
> 
> Obviously, today, there is only one vendor on that page and no mention
> of
> where open-source NAT-PT can be found. I would hope that anyone with
> more
> information would log on to the wiki and update this page and others.


	which raises the question of "eating our own dogfood"...

	there have been a number of calls for folks to take first 
	steps to get their "externally" facing DNS, SMTP, HTTP services
	visable on IPv6.   One might find this survey of interest.

	http://www.mrp.net/IPv6_Survey.html

	clearly we have a ways to go to meet the first hurdle. As for NAT-PT,
	the IETF is still trying to settle on a standard.

--bill