nanog mailing list archives
Re: NAT444 or ?
From: Jean-Francois.TremblayING () videotron com
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 13:06:11 -0400
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Randy Bush wrote:
I'm going to have to deploy NAT444 with dual-stack real soon now.you may want to review the presentations from last week's apnic meeting in busan. real mesurements. sufficiently scary that people who were heavily pushing nat444 for the last two years suddenly started to say "it was not me who pushed nat444, it was him!" as if none of us had a memory. Hm, I fail to find relevant slides discussing that. Could you please point us to those?
I had the same question. I found Miyakawa-san's presentation has some dramatic examples of CGN NAT444 effects using Google Maps: http://meetings.apnic.net/__data/assets/file/0011/38297/Miyakawa-APNIC-KEYNOTE-IPv6-2011-8.pptx.pdf However these are with a very high address-sharing ratio (several thousands users per address). Using a sparser density (<= 64 users per address) is likely to show much less dramatic user impacts. /JF
Current thread:
- RE: NAT444 or ?, (continued)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Dan Wing (Sep 08)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Mark Tinka (Sep 09)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Dobbins, Roland (Sep 09)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Mark Tinka (Sep 09)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Dobbins, Roland (Sep 09)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Cameron Byrne (Sep 10)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 11)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Dobbins, Roland (Sep 11)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Cameron Byrne (Sep 11)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Dan Wing (Sep 08)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Jean-Francois . TremblayING (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Daniel Roesen (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Seth Mos (Sep 07)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Dorn Hetzel (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 07)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Owen DeLong (Sep 07)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 08)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Cameron Byrne (Sep 08)
- what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Christian de Larrinaga (Sep 08)