[arin-ppml] IPv6 Non-connected networks

[Kevin Kargel]

> I strongly suspect that most consumers use NAT because that's how
> their providers configure it and couldn't care less (or even know)
> about it.
> 
> Craig
> 

I  will agree with this statement. I will even go on to say that most of the consumers I know of will be thrilled when NAT goes away and their Xbox and PS2 actually work without a bunch of silly router tricks.  

I don't see what all the IPv6 NAT hoopla is about..  if you want to do NAT or PAT and your hardware supports it fine, go ahead, no skin off anyone else's nose.  All you have to do is blackhole a piece of your IPv6 space from the outside at your edge and NAT to it from the inside.  There is no problem and there is no need for 1918ish space.  The reason for 1918 in the first place was to conserve space.  Now that consumers don't need to conserve space to that degree there is no need to continue that demon.  

A great benefit to using routable space in your "NAT" network is that if you ever need to involve tech support on a piece of natted hardware all it takes is a simple hole in the firewall to them and shazaam they can route directly to your internal device.  Then when they are done you just remove the firewall hole and you are back to your nice obscurely secure environment.

Kevin