nanog mailing list archives
Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6
From: "Constantine A. Murenin" <mureninc () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:02:07 -0800
On 18 January 2013 14:00, William Herrin <bill () herrin us> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Jean-Francois Mezei <jfmezei_nanog () vaxination ca> wrote:Should NAT become prevalent and prevent innovation because of its limitations, this means that innovation will happen only with IPv6 which means the next "must have" viral applications will require IPv6 and this may spur the move away from an IPv4 that has been crippled by NAT everywhere.It won't happen and I'll tell you why not. Client to client communication block diagrams: Without NAT: Client->Router->Router->Router->Router->Router->Client With NAT: Client->Router->Router->Relay->Router->Router->Client At a high level, the two communication diagrams are virtually identical. Add killer app. By it's nature, a killer app is something folks will pay good money for. This means that 100% of killer apps have sufficient funding to install those specialty relays. Odds of a killer app where one router can't be replaced with a specialty relay while maintaining the intended function: not bloody likely. Regards, Bill Herrin
The killer app of the internet is called p2p. Don't we already have a shortage of IPv4 addresses to start abandoning p2p, and requiring every service to be server-based, wasting extra precious IPv4 addresses? Where's the logic behind this: make it impossible for two computers to community directly because we have a shortage of addresses, yet introduce a third machine with, again, rather limited resources, to waste another IPv4 address? Wasting all kinds of extra resources and adding extra latency? That's not a killer app, that's the inefficiency of capitalism. C.
Current thread:
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6, (continued)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Joe Maimon (Jan 17)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Owen DeLong (Jan 17)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Joe Maimon (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Owen DeLong (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Jean-Francois Mezei (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 William Herrin (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Jean-Francois Mezei (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Doug Barton (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Mike Jones (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 19)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Constantine A. Murenin (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 William Herrin (Jan 19)
- Message not available
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Owen DeLong (Jan 17)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Lee Howard (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Joe Maimon (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Lee Howard (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 William Herrin (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Owen DeLong (Jan 18)
- Re: Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6 Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 18)