[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
NAT444 or ?
- Subject: NAT444 or ?
- From: Jean-Francois.TremblayING at videotron.com (Jean-Francois.TremblayING at videotron.com)
- Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 13:06:11 -0400
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Randy Bush wrote:
> > I'm going to have to deploy NAT444 with dual-stack real soon now.
> you may want to review the presentations from last week's apnic meeting
> in busan. real mesurements. sufficiently scary that people who were
> heavily pushing nat444 for the last two years suddenly started to say
> "it was not me who pushed nat444, it was him!" as if none of us had a
> memory.
>
> Hm, I fail to find relevant slides discussing that. Could you please
> point us to those?
I had the same question. I found Miyakawa-san's presentation has some
dramatic examples of CGN NAT444 effects using Google Maps:
http://meetings.apnic.net/__data/assets/file/0011/38297/Miyakawa-APNIC-KEYNOTE-IPv6-2011-8.pptx.pdf
However these are with a very high address-sharing ratio (several
thousands users per address). Using a sparser density (<= 64 users per
address) is likely to show much less dramatic user impacts.
/JF