Re: [arin-ppml] NAT444 rumors (was Re: Looking for an IPv6 naysayer...)

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Feb 18, 2011, at 3:33 AM, Andrew Yourtchenko wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Zed Usser <zzuser () yahoo com> wrote:
>
> > Now correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't some kind of NAT/PAT going to be required to join the IPv4 and IPv6
> > domains in all foreseeable futures? If so, aren't we going to have to deal with these issues in any case?
>
> I'd compare it with borrowing some money:
>
> When you make NAT64 to reach from IPv6 to IPv4, you are borrowing the
> money to build a new house.
> When you make NAT444, you borrow the money to repay the debt you made
> by borrowing the previous month.
>
> Both are borrowing.
>
> Depending on the circumstances you may need both.
>
> cheers,
> andrew

If you are in a circumstance where you need to borrow money this month to repay your debt
from last month, then, generally, you are on the fast track to bankruptcy court or a congressional
investigation, perhaps both, depending on the size of debt snowball you are able to build.

In the first case, you borrow money to leverage equity and there is a reasonable chance that
by the time you pay off the loan, the value of what you built exceeds the amount borrowed.

In the second case, you end up in a lather-rinse-repeat process where your debt load continues
to grow and grow until it overpowers you.

It's a good analogy, but, the second form of borrowing is far worse than the first.

Owen