Just because I *have* a NAT box to use at home doesn't mean I *like* NAT.
I expect to find deployment of IPv6 at home challenging, in part because I've
already spent my 'five-year-plan' funds on networks for home.
Its the same road-trap digital TV is caught in: people do not rush out and buy
even small communications/technology investments as throw-away devices. TV sets
last for 5-10 years. Hi-Fi sets last even longer. $5 low-fi radios last almost
forever, sliding down the hierarchy from the living room, to the kitchen, to the
garage.
I expect my Nat box to last another two or three years. I do not expect the
vendor to be able to ship an IPv6 ready image for this box. Therefore I will
have to convince the 'house funding committee' to let me replace this box before
its real end-of-life window. That is hard, set against the cost of painting the
house, or urgent repairs to the steps, or replacing the VHS recorder by a DVD
player.
If a massive volume of IPv6 ready NAT or other boxes arrived on the market right
now, I do not think the take-up would be explosive. The early adopters might buy
in but it would require the *default* configuration to new players to be fully
V6 enabled, and even then the rollover time in the home segment would be
measured in years.
NAT is irrelevant to this IPv6 deployment thing. its neither an obstruction nor
a benefit. The business cycle and non-financial motivations about spending and
lifestyle are just as relevant, if not more so.
If my home network supplier let me have multiple IPv4 DHCP addresses that
were routable behind the cable box, I would probably still keep this NAT box,
even if I did turn off NAT.
I still have my recordplayer connected to my Hi-Fi even if I don't play records
much.
cheers
-George