Re: IPv6 Confusion

[Randy Bush <randy () psg com>]

> Do you really want to keep state for hundreds of end user devices in
> your equipment?
>
> In my mind, IPv6 more than ever requires the customer to have their
> own L3 device (which you delegate a /56 to with DHCPv6-PD).
>
> Imagine the size of your TCAM needed with antispoofing ACLs and
> adjacancies when the customer has 100 active IPv6 addresses (remember
> that IPv6 enabled devices often have multiple IPv6 addresses, my
> windows machine regularily grabs 3 for instance).

we do not have to imagine.  c & j have both demonstrated the nat scaling
problem when protyping for comcast.  that is why the idea of a 'carrier
grade' nat in the core has become man near-edge nats and ds-lite.  it is
sorely broken architecture.

randy