Re: Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Mar 12, 2012, at 12:50 PM, Tim Chown wrote:

> On 12 Mar 2012, at 19:30, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> > I know my view is unpopular, but, I really would rather see PI made inexpensive and readily available than see NAT 
> > brought into the IPv6 mainstream. However, in my experience, very few residential customers make use of that 3G 
> > backup port.
>
> So what assumptions do you think future IPv6-enabled homenets might make about the prefixes they receive or can use?  
>  Isn't having a PI per residential homenet rather unlikely?

Yes, but, having reasonable and/or multiple PA prefixes is very likely and there is no reason not to use that instead 
of cobbled solutions based on NPT.

> It would be desirable to avoid NPTv6 in the homenet scenario.

Very much so. (Or any other scenario I can think of as well).

Owen