Operational challenges of no NAT

[George Bonser]

> 
> 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.

Of course they are.  When v4 runs out, they lose their ability to
provision new customers once they run out of PA space themselves.  If
they want new customers, they will need to push hard on V6 adoption and
push to get that adoption wide enough so that v6 is actually useful.

 
> 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.

That is because the only thing v6 offers is "more IP addresses". It
greatly complicates things for no additional benefit from the
perspective of many end users.  Now if there were some new technology
that could only be supported on v6 and there was some great clamor for
that technology, that would act to pull v6 into the network.  There are
no such technologies or applications at present.  So if you are an
operation that isn't under IP address pressure, then v6 is more work for
little actual gain at this point.

The NSPs are going to be the ones really pushing it as it DOES directly
impact their business.  A person who hands out IP addresses for a living
is in a world of hurt when they run out.