Keith,
Thank you for your insightful response to my posting. Is it fair to say
then, that in the year 2001, there appears to be no widely deployable
alternative to NAT?
Kevin
--- Keith Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kevin,
>
> I don't disagree with most of your assertions, except perhaps one or
> two.
> Here's the gap in a nutshell:
>
> The fact that NATs are widely deployed means that several quite
> useful
> applications are having great difficulty being deployed. You may not
> think you want to participate in the great global address space, but
> you might not realize what you're missing as the result of the
> inability
> to do so. The market has very limited foresight, which means that it
> can run into dead ends. The potential market for applications in an
> IPv6 Internet is far greater than that for a NATted IPv4 Internet,
> but that doesn't mean that market forces alone will bring about
> adoption
> of IPv6.
>
> > And now the question(s) of the day:
> >
> > What is the solution that can be deployed today or in the next 6
> months
> > that will replace the function of NATs in the IPv4 Internet? What
> about
> > in the next year? 2 years?
>
> you can't replace NATs in the v4 Internet.
> you can however provide new functionality that will allow deployment
> of applications that won't work in a NATted v4 Internet.
>
> - 6to4 lets you tunnel v6 over the existing v4 internet
>
> - a IPv6 over UDP tunneling scheme would let you transmit IPv6 over
> your NATted v4 private network until it got upgraded to transmit
> v6 natively
>
> - extensions to PPP and/or DHCP to request blocks of addresses
> (rather than just a single address) would allow implementation
> of the "plug a network anywhere into the network" feature
> of NATs without actually resorting to address translation
>
> - renumbering still needs a considerable amount of work. perhaps
> we need extensions to routing protocols to advertise upcoming
> renumbering events (new prefixes become valid in XXXX seconds;
> old prefixes become invalid in YYYY seconds, with some reasonable
> time between the two), with similar extensions to DHCP and to the
> APIs used by applications.
>
> this could all be deployable in 2 years, but the last bit would be
> tight. the rest could be done much sooner.
>
> Keith
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
