On Mar 12, 2012, at 12:50 PM, Tim Chown wrote: > > On 12 Mar 2012, at 19:30, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> I know my view is unpopular, but, I really would rather see PI made >> inexpensive and readily available than see NAT brought into the IPv6 >> mainstream. However, in my experience, very few residential customers make >> use of that 3G backup port. > > So what assumptions do you think future IPv6-enabled homenets might make > about the prefixes they receive or can use? Isn't having a PI per > residential homenet rather unlikely? >
Yes, but, having reasonable and/or multiple PA prefixes is very likely and there is no reason not to use that instead of cobbled solutions based on NPT. > It would be desirable to avoid NPTv6 in the homenet scenario. > Very much so. (Or any other scenario I can think of as well). Owen
