ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all

2007-08-18 11:35:05

On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Keith Moore wrote:

one of the areas in which I think the IPv4 design failed is that it
didn't really follow the catenet model.  it was not possible to extend
the network from any point.  and this is part of what led to NATs,
because there really was a need to be able to do that.  

I strongly agree, and would add that:

1. Provider independent addresses are really important to a lot of 
people, especially those responsible for bunches of machines (or for
running servers).  Without them, something like NAT is guaranteed to 
persist, in order to minimize cost and disruption of renumbering, or 
being held hostage by a provider.  

2. Essentially free addresses are really important to a lot of people, 
especially anyone responsible for bunches of machines... Without them, 
something like NAT is guaranteed to persist, in order to minimize 
cost.

Sounds like the "scarcity-based" v6 allocation policies (and any 
constraints on who can get PI addresses) will guarantee IETFer's worst 
nightmare: v6 NATs forever.

-teg

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf