Dear Martin,
I think you're confused. Whatever IPv6 source address is in the
outgoing packet from the CPE is bound 1:1 to the subscriber. You
can't
conceal the address of the subscriber, if you ever want to get any
packets back.
The outgoing packet is bound 1:1 to the ISP of the subscriber, any only
the ISP knows to which of his customers he is routing the datagrams
during any specific point in time. The DHCP lease should be 24h at
most and the ISP is bound by data protection laws to not make the
mapping publicly accessible except under very specific legal
exceptions.
I do not know if this is a current environment, or what you would like to see
(A reference would be good).
If you wish to rotate through address space, you could still use the 24 hour
lease either as a replacement for or in addition to your static prefix in IPv6,
but you do not need to use NAT.
One would use DHCPv6-PD to request the lease for a period, Router Advertise it
downstream to your devices, which use it only for 24h, and at the end of the
time return the prefix to the pool.
The mapping then becomes a routing one, rather than a NAT one, and the routing
mapping only exists as long as the connection is available (if using PPP) AND
the DHCP lease is held (under the same rules or laws you indicate).
While I do not think there is an option to "return this prefix to the pool, and
assign me a different prefix", it would be "trivial" to implement, and would
not create a barrier to sessions like NAT would. (Note that I would decouple
the prefix return and assignment to de-link them in time).
This is presented as a counter-example to "NAT is the answer", because this is
a technologist perspective, and there are other solutions. What we should
really be doing is engaging with industry to identify the actual need, not
choosing technical paths because of their feasibility in code.
Sincerely,
Greg Daley
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf