[123977] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IP4 Space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Thu Mar 18 21:20:41 2010
In-Reply-To: <782A77E3-D21E-4E50-98CA-1CD5A25E7018@academ.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:20:02 -0400
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: Stan Barber <sob@academ.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Stan Barber <sob@academ.com> wrote:
> Ok. Let's get back to some basics to be sure we are talking about the sam=
e things.
>
> =A0First, do you believe that a residential customer of an ISP will get a=
n IPv6 /56 assigned for use in their home? Do
> you believe that residential customer will often choose to multihome usin=
g that prefix? Do you believe that on an
> Internet that has its primary layer 3 protocol is IPv6 that a residential=
customer will still desire to do NAT for reaching
how are nat and ipv6 and multihoming related here? (also 'that has a
primary layer 3 protocol as ipv6' ... that's a LONG ways off)
-chris
> IPv6 destinations?
>
> I am looking forward to your response.
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 18, 2010, at 2:25 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>
>>> On Mar 5, 2010, at 7:24 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>>>> Joel made a remarkable assertion
>>>> that non-aggregable assignments to end users, the ones still needed
>>>> for multihoming, would go down under IPv6. I wondered about his
>>>> reasoning. Stan then offered the surprising clarification that a
>>>> reduction in the use of NAT would naturally result in a reduction of
>>>> multihoming.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:07 AM, Stan Barber <sob@academ.com> wrote:
>>> I was not trying to say there would be a reduction in multihoming. I wa=
s
>>> trying to say that the rate of increase in non-NATed single-homing
>>> would increase faster than multihoming. I guess I was not very clear.
>>
>>
>> Hi Stan,
>>
>> Your logic still escapes me. Network-wise there's not a lot of
>> difference between a single-homed =A0IPv4 /32 and a single-homed IPv6
>> /56. Host-wise there may be a difference but why would you expect that
>> to impact networks?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bill Herrin
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com =A0bill@herrin.us
>> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
>> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
>
>
>
