Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
Owen DeLong
owen at delong.com
Tue Apr 20 15:13:52 UTC 2010
On Apr 20, 2010, at 7:53 AM, John Levine wrote:
>> But regardless of what it is called people usually know what they
>> signed up for and when what has worked for the 5-6 years suddenly
>> breaks ...
>
> If a consumer ISP moved its customers from separate IPs to NAT, what
> do you think would break? I'm the guy who was behind a double NAT for
> several months without realizing it, and I can report that the only
> symptom I noticed was incoming call flakiness on one of my VoIP
> phones, and even that was easy to fix by decreasing the registration
> interval. The other VoIP phone worked fine in its default config.
>
Did you use Yahoo IM, AIM, or Skype? Did you use any of those for
Video Chat and/or to transfer files?
Did you do any peer to peer filesharing?
Did you play any MMOs?
Did you run any services?
> Other than the .01% of consumer customers who are mega multiplayer
> game weenies, what's not going to work? Actual experience as opposed
> to hypothetical hand waving would be preferable.
>
I hate to break it to you, but they are not 0.1%, they are more like 15%.
When you add in the other things that break which I have outlined above,
you start to approach 75%. I would argue that 75% is a significant and
meaningful fraction of an ISPs customer base.
> I'm not saying that NAT is wonderful, but my experience, in which day
> to day stuff all works fine, is utterly different from the doom and
> disaster routinely predicted here.
>
Perhaps your day to day is different from others. Perhaps people here
generally think in terms of servicing all of their customers. Perhaps
in many cases if just 1% of our customers are on the phone with our
technical support department, we are losing money.
YMMV.
Owen
More information about the NANOG
mailing list