Operational challenges of no NAT

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Fri Oct 29 21:46:56 CEST 2010

On 2010-10-30 08:34, David Conrad wrote:
> Brian,
> On Oct 29, 2010, at 9:24 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>> Most folks simply aren't interested in "paradigm shifts" in utility infrastructure. 
>> It's sad, after only twenty years, to see PTT (a.k.a. Ma Bell) attitudes
>> so embedded in the ISP community.
> No.  Not ISPs.  In my experience, ISPs have become quite active in investigating ways of deploying IPv6 in ways that are useful to their customers. This obviously makes sense since it is the ISPs that are going to be the ones first impacted by the lack of IP addresses. 

You're right, some ISPs are doing that, and I apologise to them. There are
others, and indeed many, many enterprise IT managers, who arent.

> The folks not interested in paradigm shifts, as demonstrated by the lack of significant IPv6 deployment, are pretty much everybody else (modulo the tiny percentage of geeks and early adopters).  These folks do not want to care how things work.  The fact that IPv6 makes them have to care is probably the worst failing of IPv6.

Unfortunately, it's actually a failing of IPv4 that they have to care,
since v4 makes no provision for address extensibility. That's been
our problem since the start - mathematically, there is no transparent
upgrade path.


More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list