Thus spake "Margaret Wasserman" <mrw(_at_)windriver(_dot_)com>
Of course, this isn't why NAT is most often used... NAT is most
often used to extend a single address to cover multiple systems
in a home or small office environment. For that environment,
an IPv6 /48 (without site-locals) would suffice to replace NAT.
When you are talking about tens of millions of customers, it's not feasible
to give each a subnet even if you have the space to do it. IMHO, most
customers will be placed on a /64 that's shared across hundreds of
customers, similar to IPv4 common practice.
There is nothing to indicate that ISPs are going to change their business
models simply because IPv6 address space is plentiful; they charge extra for
two hosts because it is assumed two hosts consume more bits than one, not
because a second IPv4 address is hard to come by.
S
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking