[arin-ppml] inevitability of NAT?

[Lee Howard]

> From: Benson Schliesser <bensons at queuefull.net>

> 
> Sadly, because we've waited too long to grow IPv6 penetration to 
> the inflection point ("the moment that end users start accepting and 
> using  IPv6"), people will still need to deploy IPv4.  Vendors will 
> make money on  NATs.  And people will find ways to get addresses 
> - one way or  another.

This is often asserted and generally accepted.  Is it true?

Nobody wants NAT: ISPs, content providers, law enforcement,
copyright holders, game console manufacturers, web advertisers,
home gateway vendors, and end users all have an interest in 
avoiding NAT.  Even NAT vendors are decorously sheepish in
selling their products.  If everyone wants to avoid it, why are we
stuck with it?

1.  ISPs aren't ready for IPv6.  This belief is rapidly being 
overtaken by events--most ISPs will have broad IPv6 this year.
2.  Content isn't ready for IPv6.  This belief is rapidly being
overtaken by events.  World IPv6 Day is a test-drive of content,
which should go a long way toward eliminating barriers.  
3.  Home gateways aren't ready for IPv6.  This belief is
slowly being overtaken by events.  All home gateway makers
are developing IPv6, and industry is doing better as telling them
what needs to be fixed.  However, it may still be true that all
home gateways sold before ARIN runout have to be replaced.
4.  Consumer electronics aren't ready for IPv6.  This is widely
true, although more embedded OSs are becoming IPv6-capable.  
Most web-capable devices will be capable of simple firmware 
or OS updates.  Untraditional networked devices (like 
entertainment systems) are in trouble.

How do we improve IPv6 uptake in these categories?  

If all of a household's devices speak IPv6, and the ISP provides
IPv6, and all of the content the household accesses is available
over IPv6 (including NAT64), that household no longer needs
IPv4.

What would it take for the number of households in that state
to increase faster than new Internet activations?  Think big--
there are a lot of stakeholders whose interests align against
NAT.

Lee