[162270] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Simon Lockhart)
Mon Apr 8 04:53:37 2013
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 09:53:20 +0100
From: Simon Lockhart <simon@slimey.org>
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <FA803B67-47DB-4374-AED0-E0E9E5F5A2D3@delong.com>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 01:41:34AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Respectfully, I disagree. If the major content providers were to deploy
> IPv6 within the next 6 months (pretty achievable even now), then the
> need for CGN would at least be very much reduced, if not virtually
> eliminated.
Surely the case is that you've still got the same number of users who need an
IPv4 address to be able to access "legacy" IPv4 sites on the Internet - until
100% of content is accessible via IPv6.
What it does, however, change is the amount of traffic which would need to
flow through a CGN box.
Unfortunately, CGN is here until either everything is available over IPv6, or
a better version of NAT64 which doesn't depend on DNS rewriting is designed
and deployed.
Simon
