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

["Dan Wing" <dwing () cisco com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen () delong com]
> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 12:59 PM
> To: Dan Wing
> Cc: 'Chris Grundemann'; 'Benson Schliesser'; 'NANOG list'; 'ARIN-PPML
> List'
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] NAT444 rumors (was Re: Looking for an IPv6
> naysayer...)
>
>
> On Feb 21, 2011, at 12:37 PM, Dan Wing wrote:
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: arin-ppml-bounces () arin net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces () arin net]
> On
> > > Behalf Of Chris Grundemann
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 5:55 PM
> > > To: Benson Schliesser
> > > Cc: NANOG list; ARIN-PPML List
> > > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] NAT444 rumors (was Re: Looking for an IPv6
> > > naysayer...)
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 14:17, Benson Schliesser
> > > <bensons () queuefull net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > If you have more experience (not including rumors) that suggests
> > > otherwise, I'd very much like to hear about it.  I'm open to the
> > > possibility that NAT444 breaks stuff - that feels right in my gut -
> but
> > > I haven't found any valid evidence of this.
> > >
> > > In case you have not already found this:
> > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-donley-nat444-impacts-01
> >
> > That document conflates problems of NAT444 with problems of NAT44
> > with problems of bandwidth starvation with problems of CGN.
> >
> > For details, see my comments at
> > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/behave/current/msg09027.html
> > and see Reinaldo Penno's comments at
> > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/behave/current/msg09030.html
> >
> > -d
>
> The document describes problems that will exist in NAT444 environments.
> It does not state that these problems would be specific to NAT444, but,
> NAT444 will cause or exacerbate each of the problems described.

To the contrary.

Its title, filename, abstract, and introduction all say the problems
are specific to NAT444.  Which is untrue.

> Yes, the problems may have other underlying root causes, but, they
> will all be present in a NAT444 environment, even if they were not
> present in the same environment prior to deployment of NAT444.
>
>
> Let me put it this way...
>
> IPv4 has a TITANIC lack of numeric addresses and has been
> stretched beyond its limits for some time now.
>
> IPv6 is a life boat.
>
> NAT is a seat cushion used for floatation.
>
> NAT444 (and other NAT-based extensions) are deck chairs.
>
> Attempting to improve them beyond their current states is
> an effort to rearrange the deck chairs.

-d