Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6)

[Mark Newton <newton () internode com au>]

On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 09:18:43PM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

> That depends.  If Amazon sees absolutely no ill effects from v6 users 
> reaching it via v4, then they obviously have little technical incentive to 
> migrate.  OTOH, if that is true, then all the whining about how "evil" 
> NAT-PT is is obviously bunk.  We can't have it both ways, folks: either 
> NAT-PT breaks things and people would move to native v6 to get away from 
> it, or NAT-PT doesn't break things and there's no reason not to use it.

The IPv4 Internet has been awash with dodgy NATs that negatively 
affect functionality ever since NAT arrived on the scene.

What has happened?  Well, application protocols have evolved to 
accommodate NAT weirdness (e.g., SIP NAT discovery), and NATs have
undergone incremental improvements, and almost no end-users care about
NATs.  As long as they can use the Google, BitTorrent and Skype, most
moms and dads neither know nor care about any technical impediments
NATs erect between them and their enjoyment of the Internet.

There's no rational reason to believe that NAT-PT would be any
different.  If NAT-PT breaks stuff, it'll get improved.  It'll
keep getting better until we don't need it anymore (or forever,
whichever comes first)

   - mark

-- 
Mark Newton                               Email:  newton () internode com au (W)
Network Engineer                          Email:  newton () atdot dotat org  (H)
Internode Systems Pty Ltd                 Desk:   +61-8-82282999
"Network Man" - Anagram of "Mark Newton"  Mobile: +61-416-202-223