Re: [v6ops] A common problem with SLAAC in "renumbering" scenarios

[Gert Doering <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 08:40:24AM +1100, Mark Smith wrote:
> > Applications today seem to be all "HTTP(S)" or "QUIC", and they all had to
> > learn how to deal with NAPT.  New protocols that embed IP addresses are
> > killed by IPv4 NAPT anyway, so that ship has sailed -
> 
> Getting it back in IPv6 is one of the things I hope we can get.
> 
> That's because applications that would be best performing, most robust and
> more secure with a peer-to-peer communications model are forced to adopt an
> absolute client-server model (where the server is a much more likely
> performance bottleneck, the server becomes a SPOF for all clients using it
> at the time, and the server is a natural interception point for a malicious
> server operator).

Have you looked out there recently?  None of the big actors in the market
seem to have any particular interest in moving away from a "we are the cloud 
content players, you are just visiting clients" model.

(The gaming industry has, to some extent, but that doesn't seem to be
a really strong driver)

[..]
> Another analogy to show the significance is that with NAT in the telephone
> network, it wouldn't be possible for me to give you this phone's number to
> call me. Would any of us accept that constraint on the usability of our
> phones?

When did you do the last phone call on your mobile tablet-like computer 
thingie?

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