Hi,

Unfortunately, that does not address most of the problems that drive the
demand for NAT.  The current economic model is:

1) Pay for addresses
2) Pay more for stable addresses
3) Pay much more for portable stable addresses

With more address space available, IPv6 may help with (1) if providers play
along.  But as we have recently seen, customer prefix lengths are already
under attack by perfectly reasonable-sounding conservation arguments.  A
need to conserve always justifies a need to charge.

The IETF cannot legislate prefix lengths, but the argument behind conservation beyond /48 would be utterly silly and demonstrates a "revenue opportunity", plain and simple.


IPv6 does nothing good for (2).  In fact it makes the situation worse by
making renumbering "easier" without making it less disruptive.  Assuming I
understand the protocol correctly, shim6 increases the premium on stable
addresses since they will be necessary for its version of PA multi-homing.
(Shim6 seems to let you build stable quasi-identifiers on top of two or
more stable locators.  I would prefer a solution that lets you build stable
identifiers on top of one or more unstable locator(s).)

This is a matter of timescale. Prefixes should be expected to change. In fact, SHIM6 should be able to provide equivalent of SCTP's ADD-IP to *devalue* prefix stability.


IPv6 itself does nothing good for (3).  PI allocations may well be available
to some set of entities for a while to ease the transition, but that just
brings us back to routing table concerns.  There is no general PI solution
on the horizon, and shim6 may make such a solution less likely to appear.

The whole point of SHIM6 from my point of view is quite the opposite by providing a means to advertise access via other prefixes. So could you please justify your above statement?

Eliot

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to