Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space

[Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi>]

I wonder who really believes there is no usage case for NAT66. Have these
people seen non-trivial corporate networks?

I'm sure many people in this list finance part of their lives with renumber
projects costing MUSDs. For many companies just finding out where addresses
have been punched in (your FWs, your software, partner FWs, partner
software, configurations...) will take months, before even starting
renumbering.

If my enterprise customers don't have plan and ask my advice, I will
recommend own PI, if they don't want (extra cost, extra clue needed) ULA
and NAT66. If I recommend more specific from our PA, I know when they
switch operators in few years time, some of them will decide renumbering is
out-of-the-question[0] and will NAT my PA to new operator PA, essentially
forcing me to never return any addresses to my free pool. I wonder if that
is valid reason to ask more allocations?  That address was once used?

More specific from our PA is fine for small offices with trivial setup,
residential networks and few niche shops who specifically design for
renumbering (but I guess these most often already want PI+BGP)

[0] I don't want NAT66 anywhere. I won't use NAT66 anywhere. But just
because we have new protocol, does not mean we have new set of people, who
share my ideologies and goals about network design. Only thing I can do, is
protect myself from problems they would cause me.

-- 
  ++ytti