Re: [v6ops] Thoughts about wider operational input

[Gert Doering <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 11:41:19AM +0100, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> Why would it not be a desirable feature for me as the
> end-user to have an IPv6/IPv6 NAT on the router towards the 3 Internet connections to
> which i multi-home ? Sure, we can probably list some downsides, but they need to be
> weighted against the benefits for me as an end user. Not ?

This being an IETF list, it is not allowed to find anything-NAT beneficial.

OTOH, as an operator, I find this a viable option.

The reason why I prefer "host has multiple GUAs" better, in theory, is
that it gives the *user* more control on what he wants - like, "I can
run my bittorrent via the cable ISP, and SSH out via LTE", by selecting
the corresponding source IP = selecting the outgoing ISP.

Now, in practice, source address selection for "there are multiple GUAs
with different pros/cons attached" is lacking quite a bit.  And HNCP
routers with source-based forwarding can not be bought.  So all the
nice things do not work.


Which means, "a router with GUAs inside, a DSL port and a LTE modem and 
NPT66 on both outside interfaces" is a really nice redundancy solution 
for basically all "mostly unmanaged" SME networks.

You'd pass control on "what should go where?" from the host to the router, 
but given that hosts are not there yet, that will get the job done.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: [phone]         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279