Nat

[Lee at asgard.org (Lee Howard)]

On 12/16/15, 7:14 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Mel Beckman"
<nanog-bounces at nanog.org on behalf of mel at beckman.org> wrote:

>Mark,
>
>Why? Why do WE "need" to force people to bend to our will? The market
>will get us all there eventually.

Some companies will run out of IPv4 addresses before others. When that
happens, they have four choices:

1. Buy IPv4 addresses. But supply is going; in a couple of years, there
will be nothing larger than a /16. And this raises costs, and therefore
consumer prices.
2. Address sharing. Breaks p2p, some other things.
3. Address family translation. Breaks several things.
4. IPv6-only. Means only IPv6-enabled content is available.

That?s why some values of $we ?need? to force people to deploy IPv6: so
$we don?t screw consumers and break the Internet.

But those with IPv4 addresses see exhaustion as someone else?s problem.
They don?t care if somebody else?s prices go up, unless they?re the ones
blamed for the rising prices. (?You have to pay more for Internet access
or you won?t be able to reach Amazon or eBay.?)
They might not like the performance of address sharing/translation, but if
they wait until they notice the pain, and it takes them two years to
respond, they?re already in serious trouble.

There is still time for companies without IPv6 to get it deployed before
going out of business. But anyone who isn?t done two years from now is in
trouble.

Lee