nanog mailing list archives
Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
From: William Herrin <bill () herrin us>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 07:18:18 -0400
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
On Apr 21, 2010, at 3:26 PM, Roger Marquis wrote:William Herrin wrote:Not to take issue with either statement in particular, but I think there needs to be some consideration of what "fail" means.Fail means that an inexperienced admin drops a router in place of the firewall to work around a priority problem while the senior engineer is on vacation. With NAT protecting unroutable addresses, that failure mode fails closed.In addition to fail-closed NAT also means: * search engines and and connectivity providers cannot (easily) differentiate and/or monitor your internal hosts, andRight, because nobody has figured out Javascript and Cookies.
Having worked for comScore, I can tell you that having a fixed address in the lower 64 bits would make their jobs oh so much easier. Cookies and javascript are of very limited utility. On the other hand, I could swear I've seen a draft where the PC picks up random unused addresses in the lower 64 for each new outbound connection for anonymity purposes. Even if there is no such draft, it wouldn't exactly be hard to implement. It won't take NAT to anonymize the PCs on a LAN with IPv6.
* multiple routes do not have to be announced or otherwise accommodated by internal re-addressing.I fail to see how NAT even affects this in a properly structured network.
That's your failure, not Roger's. As delivered, IPv6 is capable of dynamically assigning addresses from multiple subnets to a PC, but that's where the support for multiple-PA multihoming stops. PCs don't do so well at using more than one of those addresses at a time for outbound connections. As a number of vendors have done with IPv4, an IPv6 NAT box at the network border can spread outbound connections between multiply addressed upstream links. On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Franck Martin <franck () genius com> wrote:
http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF The energy that people are willing to spend to fix it (NAT, LSN), rather than bite the bullet is amazing.
A friend of mine drives a 1976 Cadillac El Dorado. I asked him why once. He explained that even at 8 miles to the gallon and even after having to find 1970's parts for it, he can't get anything close to as luxurious a car from the more modern offerings at anything close to the comparatively small amount of money he spends. The thing has plush leather seats that feel like sinking in to a comfy couch and an engine with more horsepower than my mustang gt. It isn't hard to see his point. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ herrin () dirtside com bill () herrin us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
Current thread:
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?, (continued)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Roger Marquis (Apr 20)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Jack Bates (Apr 20)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Franck Martin (Apr 20)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Chris Adams (Apr 21)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Roger Marquis (Apr 21)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Owen DeLong (Apr 21)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Franck Martin (Apr 21)
- Looking for an Admin at the IANA... todd glassey (Apr 22)
- Re: Looking for an Admin at the IANA... bmanning (Apr 22)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Mark Smith (Apr 23)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Owen DeLong (Apr 21)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? William Herrin (Apr 22)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? bmanning (Apr 22)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? William Herrin (Apr 22)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? bmanning (Apr 22)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Roger Marquis (Apr 20)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Owen DeLong (Apr 22)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Simon Perreault (Apr 22)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Jim Burwell (Apr 22)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Owen DeLong (Apr 22)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Matthew Kaufman (Apr 22)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Jim Burwell (Apr 22)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Jack Bates (Apr 23)