[137868] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: [arin-ppml] NAT444 rumors (was Re: Looking for an
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dan Wing)
Mon Feb 21 21:08:45 2011
From: "Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com>
To: "'Owen DeLong'" <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <41EE506B-D6BA-4AB5-A211-41BFE114F70E@delong.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 18:08:34 -0800
Cc: 'NANOG list' <nanog@nanog.org>, 'ARIN-PPML List' <arin-ppml@arin.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> -----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
