Re: [shim6] Exit selection [New Version Notification - draft-mrw-nat66-08.txt]

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 2011-03-14 14:09, Fred Baker wrote:
> On Mar 13, 2011, at 4:16 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> 
>> If you mean NPTv6, yes, it's heresy but it will no doubt get its share of the market. I see shim6 and multihoming-without-nat as part of the longer term future for medium scale enterprise sites.
> 
> Very possibly, if you can get enterprise networks to deploy it. At this point, it is largely DOA. What do you think the reason might be?

IMHO:

Firstly, because it isn't in Windows.

Secondly, because it was explicitly badmouthed by various operators a couple
of years ago, in my opinion because they didn't really understand it and
were just getting to grips with the immediate problems of deploying v6
at all.

Thirdly, because we really don't need it yet. We don't need it for
early adopters of v6 and we don't need it for very large enterprises
who can perfectly well use PI/BGP4. We also don't need it for
SOHO users, who manage well enough behind NAT44 and will manage well
enough behind NPTv6.

We'll find out in a few years whether we need shim6 for the medium
size enterprises who will discover that they want address transparency.

Oh, and we'd better make IPv6 renumbering work too. BOF in Prague.

   Brian