Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6

[Lee Howard <Lee () asgard org>]

On 1/18/13 1:03 PM, "Joe Maimon" <jmaimon () ttec com> wrote:

> Lee Howard wrote:
>
> > If an ISP is so close to running out of addresses that they need CGN,
> > let's say they have 1 year of addresses remaining.  Given how many ports
> > apps use, recommendations are running to 10:1 user:address (but I could
> > well imagine that increasing to 50:1).  That means that for every user
> > you
> > NAT, you get 1/10 of an address.
> > Example:  An 10,000-user ISP is growing at 10% annually.  They have
> > 1,000
> > addresses left, so they implement CGN.  You say to assuming 90% of them
> > can be NATted, so next year, 100 get a unique IPv4 address, the other
> > 900
> > share 90 addresses.  At 190 addresses per year, CGN bought you five
> > years.
> >
> > I think your 90% is high.  If it's 70%, you burn 370 per year.
> > That doesn't include the fact the increased support costs, or alienated
> > customer cancellations, or any of the stuff I talked about in TCO of
> > CGN.
> >
> > Lee
>
> 2-5 years from a currently one year supply?
> Factor in the current base and growth for at least another decade is
> assured.
> If it works for the new subscribers, it will work for the existing ones.

It is difficult to change an existing customer's service.  Good luck.


> Does anybody doubt that successful CGN deployment easily translates into
> many years more of v4?

Yes, I doubt it.  Although if you define "successful" as "many more years
of IPv4" my doubts vanish solipsistically.


> We understand that there are hosts of theoretical and practical impacts.
> What we do not yet know is how the public and providers at large will
> react or adapt to these impacts.
>
> If just the right balance of CGN negativity and resulting v6 adoption is
> the result, then we will all muddle through more or less ok.
>
> Otherwise we will be seeing either frantic v6 migration everywhere or
> even slower pace then what we have now.

Fear, uncertainty, doubt.  Possible frantic migration.
These sound bad to me.

Lee



> Joe