[arin-ppml] The role of NAT in IPv6

[Scott Leibrand]

Chris,

Can you describe the 1:many PAT use case for IPv6? I get the need for  
1:1 NAT, but not for 1:many PAT.

Thanks,
Scott

On Mar 29, 2010, at 9:00 AM, Chris Engel <cengel at sponsordirect.com>  
wrote:

>
> This discussion never ceases to amaze me... though it is very  
> similar to some I've experienced in the IETF NAT66 mailing list. On  
> the one hand...you have alot of folks moaning about why IPv6  
> adoption is so slow...and the problems that are going to be caused  
> by that to the internet as a whole... and wondering what can be done  
> to spur quicker adoption.
>
> Then when some people come along and say.... You know I'd be more  
> likely to consider adopting IPv6 but it doesn't support X (fill in  
> whatever you want for X) and I really need/want to use X. You turn  
> around and dismiss them saying.... oh you're wrong, X is evil. We  
> should never support X...in fact we should do everything we can to  
> prevent X from being supported in IPv6.
> Then you wonder why the very same people aren't falling all over  
> themselves to adopt IPv6?
>
> As an analogy...imagine you're selling phones. You put your brand  
> new yellow phone out on the market and discover that sales are flat.  
> Some portion of your customer base turns around and says... "You  
> know...I'd consider your phone, but I really need it in black."  You  
> respond "Oh black is a horrible color.... you should never use  
> black. You don't need black... WE know what you need... you need  
> yellow. You can have any color that you want.... as long as it's  
> YELLOW."
> Then you turn around and scratch your heads wondering why you aren't  
> selling more phones.
>
>
> I don't know about the average home user. I'm sure most of them  
> don't care about the technical details of how thier internet service  
> is delivered to them/configured....as long as they can get to the  
> sites they want. However for the Enterprise customers... NAT is  
> considered very important. I can think of at least a half dozen ways  
> in which it is useful to me.... have posted them before to this  
> list. I can only think of a single incident where NAT caused any  
> difficulty to me while working here....and that was a very minor and  
> unimportant issue.
>
> I hate to tell you all this but...IF IPv6 does see general  
> adoption...NAT/PAT (including many:1 NAT) WILL eventualy be running  
> under it. The reason is simple....there are too many people just  
> like me that find it useful and are willing to pay for it. Eventualy  
> there WILL be vendors who recognize that demand and want to CASH IN  
> on it. They will find a way to make it work in IPv6 even if it  
> involves some very ugly hacks to the protocol.... and you WILL be  
> living on an internet that involves NAT. The only thing that you  
> will achieve by fighting to make NAT harder to use in IPv6 is  
> slowing the adoption of IPv6 itself.
>
>
>
>
>
> Christopher Engel
> _______________________________________________
> 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.