[126060] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Timmins)
Thu Apr 29 11:30:28 2010
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 11:29:43 -0400
From: Paul Timmins <paul@telcodata.us>
To: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <01F57362-8092-48CB-8336-15B9CC1713C2@virtualized.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
David Conrad wrote:
> On Apr 28, 2010, at 2:38 PM, Carl Rosevear wrote:
>
>> I don't understand why anyone thinks NAT should be a fundamental part of the v6 internet
>>
>
> Perhaps the ability to change service providers without having to renumber?
Number your internal network on ULA, and put public addresses on your
machines as well.
RFC3484 support in your OS will cause your machine to use ULA to talk to
other ULA interfaces, and the public IP to the rest of the internet.
If you change ISPs, send out an RA with the new addresses, wait a bit,
then send out an RA with lifetime 0 on the old address. All the machines
should drop their old ISP's IP, and start using the new ISP, as well as
continue using ULA like nothing's changed for the internal file
sharing/printing/whatever
