Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary

Owen DeLong owen at
Mon Mar 12 15:04:40 CDT 2012

On Mar 12, 2012, at 12:50 PM, Tim Chown wrote:

> On 12 Mar 2012, at 19:30, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> I know my view is unpopular, but, I really would rather see PI made inexpensive and readily available than see NAT brought into the IPv6 mainstream. However, in my experience, very few residential customers make use of that 3G backup port.
> So what assumptions do you think future IPv6-enabled homenets might make about the prefixes they receive or can use?   Isn't having a PI per residential homenet rather unlikely?

Yes, but, having reasonable and/or multiple PA prefixes is very likely and there is no reason not to use that instead of cobbled solutions based on NPT.

> It would be desirable to avoid NPTv6 in the homenet scenario.

Very much so. (Or any other scenario I can think of as well).


More information about the NANOG mailing list