[arin-ppml] The role of NAT in IPv6

[Owen DeLong]

On Mar 26, 2010, at 4:18 PM, Gary T. Giesen wrote:

> There have to be controls. Obviously the burden to renumber a few
> servers and half a dozen workstations is far less than an organization
> with 5,000 servers and 50,000 employees, so the bar has to be set
> somewhere. I'm just saying it should be set lower than it currently is.
> 
I'm saying it should be set by ISPs and not by ARIN. If you don't
want to carry such a route on your routers, don't. It shouldn't make
any difference at the ARIN level whether a route will or will not
be used for internet connectivity or some subset thereof.

> But chances are a company of that size won't know the difference anyways
> and will accept whatever their provider hands them.
> 
Especially if they can't find a provider that can get their prefix
accepted by all the other  provider.

> I'm not saying that developing the appropriate policy will be easy, but
> given the alternative (NAT), I vote to try. Not only that, my suggestion
> requires the development of exactly *zero* new
> protocols/implementations. This gives time for vendors to catch up
> without worrying about trying to hit a moving target. We've got the
> protocol now, and the mechanisms we need to deploy it. Let's not further
> delay adoption because we're clinging onto a bastardized hack which was
> designed only to prolong the life of the old protocol and is completely
> unnecessary in the new one.
> 
Here Here!!

> Obviously you've never been on the other end of a call of a customer who
> has (mis)configured policy-NAT on their SMB gateway which shoots packets
> sourced from different IPs based on the the port and what day of the
> month it is. IPv6 was actually designed to be simpler than v4. Let's not
> change that.
> 
ROFL -- Agreed.


Owen

> On Fri, 2010-03-26 at 19:00 -0400, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
>> Gary T. Giesen wrote:
>>> 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). 
>>> 
>> 
>> Right, and so this argues for ARIN to make it easy *and cheap* for a 
>> newly-formed single-homed company with a half-dozen employees and a few 
>> servers to get globally-unique *and* routable IPv6 address space.
>> 
>> Matthew Kaufman
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.