multiple prefixes

Lorenzo Colitti lorenzo at
Tue Feb 12 09:22:23 CET 2013

On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Doug Barton <dougb at> wrote:

>> Higher operational cost caused by more complex, stateful operation of
>> the network. Lower reliability due to NAT leading to loss of said state
>> and interrupted sessions. Higher capex caused by boxes having to do more
>> complex stuff (NAT vs. route). Higher cost and a higher barrier to entry
>> for application developers as they each have to re-learn NAT traversal
>> (and no, NAT traversal is *not* the same as traversing a stateful
>> firewall - that's easier). Lower quality of service when said
>> applications perform worse. Believe it or not, Skype on my phone works
>> better on the a one-NAT 3G network than on a double-natted 1Gbps fiber
>> connection.
> What you described were all costs of NAT, no argument.
> Now can you please describe how those things are relevant to NPTv6?

Take out the costs that are due to stateful inspection (and remember,
translation is more expensive than forwarding) and leave the rest.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list