using "reserved" IPv6 space

Ray Soucy rps at
Tue Jul 17 13:06:15 UTC 2012

With all due respect to Owen, I don't share the view that everyone
should be jumping into BGP or getting an allocation from ARIN, but
that's been a long-standing debate between us.

NPT allows you to get prefixes from multiple ISPs without having to
get an allocation to coordinate routing; or in the other example,
without having to have host systems maintain multiple global prefixes
(which quickly becomes a security nightmare for auditing; a
troubleshooting nightmare for support, etc).

As far as it being costly, I think too much of the mindset on list is
the large network or ISP perspective; for the small network that NPT
is targeting, all this would happen in some "Dual WAN" multi-function
firewall appliance.  Modern hardware is often powerful enough to
vastly exceed transport capacity for these networks, so the
performance "cost" is a non-issue.

All these other methods place far too much control on the host system
(and its implementation) to be ready for prime time yet; the reality
is that without NPT being widely available, we won't see 99% of small
businesses using IPv6 for a long time, so if our goal is IPv6 adoption
maybe it's time we stop the holy war on anything "NAT".

Hammer has echoed legitimate concerns and confusion that represents a
very large portion of the user base out there.  Maybe we should be
asking why that is instead of telling him he doesn't understand
anything and that NAT is "evil".

Ray Soucy

Epic Communications Specialist

Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526

Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System

More information about the NANOG mailing list