Is NAT can provide some kind of protection?

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Sat Jan 15 17:17:27 CST 2011


On Jan 15, 2011, at 3:06 PM, Brandon Ross wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Jan 2011, Brian Keefer wrote:
> 
>> Actually there are a couple very compelling reasons why PAT will probably be implemented for IPv6:
> 
> You are neglecting the most important reason, much to my own disdain. Service providers will continue to assign only a single IP address to residential users unless they pay an additional fee for additional addresses.  Since many residential users won't stand for an additional fee, pressure will be placed on CPE vendors to include v6 PAT in their devices.
> 
> -- 
> Brandon Ross                                              AIM:  BrandonNRoss
>                                                               ICQ:  2269442
>                                   Skype:  brandonross  Yahoo:  BrandonNRoss

I really doubt this will be the case in IPv6.

The few service providers that try this will rapidly find their customers moving to service providers that do not.

I know that Comcast is not planning to do this to their customers. I can't imagine too many ISPs that might
even attempt to get away with treating their customers worse than Comcast does.


Owen





More information about the NANOG mailing list