IP4 Space - the lie
owen at delong.com
Fri Mar 5 12:16:09 CST 2010
> there is a real danger here ... wholesale adoption of a
> translation technology, esp one that is integrated into
> the network kind of ensures that it will never get pulled out -
> or that the enduser will have a devil of a time routing around
> it when it no longer works for her - but the ISP sees her as a
> statistically anomaly.
> I would argue that the right/correct place for such translation
> technology is very close to the edge - in much the same way as
> NAT technology is roughl an "edge" technology. (ok - it used to be but w/
> CGN .. its clearly moved.
> we -need- the technologies - but only for a while. otherwise they
> become a drug that we are dependent on. and we will be stuck on the
> dual-stack plateau for a much longer time that we should.
> imho of coure ... YM (and business models) MV
While the DS-LIte mechanism does involve moving the NAT
towards the Core instead of leaving it at the edge, the advantage
is that you can route around it very easily as an end-user. Every
thing the end user sends to an IPv6 destination bypasses the NAT
box completely and only IPv4 is afflicted.
I think that will be fairly easy to deprecate over time vs. many
many edge-NATs and layers of NATs near the edge.
More information about the NANOG