[arin-ppml] IPv4 Depletion as an ARIN policy concern

[Lee Dilkie]

Joe Maimon wrote:
>
> Is not that what you are doing by advocating denying NAT to these
> administrators, the end users of these protocols? If they are quite
> satisfied dealing with the obstacles and limitations NAT brings them
> with IPv4, why the strenuous objections to allowing them to continue
> that way with IPv6?
>
> So whats the real reason NAT is so hated?
>
> Because it also gives protocol designers and people OTHER than the end
> user or network administrator grief.
>
> So in summary, NAT66 detractors want to override network
> administrators habits and concerns because it makes their world view
> happier.
>
> That seems a bit one sided.
>
>
Indeed.

Except that NAT breaks lots of protocols by breaking a fundamental
network requirement. Universal addressing. And how many billions of
dollars are wasted in re-designing protocols to work with NAT because,
despite what the net admin wants, the actual users require working
applications and protocols.

What NAT brings to the table is, if I may use a telephony analogy, a
return to the time before direct dial long distance calling. To the time
of calling the operator to place a call.

For brief time in the early 90's, pre NAT, we early adoptors all had
real addresses at our desks and clean protocols... Oh yeah, we also have
firewalls too..

-lee