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

[Paul G. Timmins]

-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Maimon [mailto:jmaimon at chl.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 3:51 PM
To: Paul G. Timmins
Cc: Chris Grundemann; Chris Engel; arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPv4 Depletion as an ARIN policy concern



> Paul G. Timmins wrote:
> >
> > Taking this to its logical conclusion, it's not necessary for
community
> > consensus to implement NAT66. If people demand it, and equipment
vendors
> > want to implement it, they will, and then will standardize it after
the
> > fact, much like many other current standards have been done.
> >
> > The fact that no such standard exists and no platform I'm aware of
> > implements NAT66 is pretty telling in and of itself.
> >
> > -Paul
> >
> >
> >   
> What is proper is to stop demanding that everyone not want to use it.

I demand people stop using ISL and EIGRP and they seem to proliferate
anyway. Features people want seem to trump even vocal opposition. If you
want it, make vendor C and vendor J implement it. They won't care what
we say if you're waving cash under their nose.

> Furthermore, at this similar state in IPv4 global deployment, NAT44 
> wasnt really available either, and instead people were using other 
> horrible workarounds.

Yea, like public IPs and stateful firewalls. Possibly even floating IPs
that get bound to whatever machine is doing things. Awful stuff! I
remember those days and wonder how we ever survived.

Amusingly a reading of RFC-1631 shows even its designers had the
misgivings about it we're articulating now.

-Paul