[arin-ppml] The role of NAT in IPv6

[Gary T. Giesen]

If that's a concern, then get GUA space out of the gate and you'll never
renumber again. I believe GUA should be made cheap and relatively easy
to get (instead of something using something like ULA and NATing it). 

While some will argue this will lead to an explosion in the v6 routing
table (and there is definitely merit to their argument), the aggregation
gains from people who don't need the capability (especially residential
customers) should more than offset it in the near term, buying time for
for the technology to progress and offer us more TCAM slots to deal with
it in the longer term.

GG

On Fri, 2010-03-26 at 17:54 -0400, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
> Gary T. Giesen wrote:
> > IMHO it's better to get people used to having no NAT at all (since
> > they're getting used to a new protocol anyways)...
> Please explain how you intend to eliminate manual renumbering for 
> corporate internal networks every time they change ISPs.
> 
> (And note that RA and even DHCP6 don't fix all the manual setup of 
> things like "what is the address of the intranet web server".)
> 
> There is a real cost to this, and the cost of a NAT device is pretty 
> much paid off the first or second time you're forced to renumber.
> 
> Matthew Kaufman