IPv6 Confusion

Frank Bulk frnkblk at iname.com
Thu Feb 19 05:07:29 CST 2009


The really scary thing is that deploying carrier-grade NAT might be cheaper
to the service provider than rolling IPv6 to its residential subscribers.

Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Oberman [mailto:oberman at es.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 3:30 PM
To: Owen DeLong
Cc: 'Carl Rosevear'; nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: IPv6 Confusion 

<snip>

The big iron folks are proposing something called "Carrier Grade
NAT". This one REALLY frightens me, but I understand a couple of hardware
manufacturers are planning on building such a monster. It might actually
work, but the amount of state carried strikes me as in invitation to
disaster. There was a draft on CNG, but it expired last month. A copy is
still available at:
http://smakd.potaroo.net/ietf/all-ids/draft-nishitani-cgn-00.txt

Also, a proposal for a different approach is at:
http://mice.cs.columbia.edu/getTechreport.php?techreportID=560 (PDF)

If you are really concerned about where we go whan v4 address space is
exhausted, I strongly urge you to look at all of these issues.
--
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: oberman at es.net                  Phone: +1 510 486-8634
Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4  EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751






More information about the NANOG mailing list