Light Reading
Chris Donley, project director for network protocols at Cable Labs, explains the problems CGN will introduce for some network services
Video

The Case Against Carrier-Grade NAT

50%
50%
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
yarn
50%
50%
yarn,
User Rank: Light Sabre
12/5/2012 | 4:58:57 PM
re: The Case Against Carrier-Grade NAT


If CG-NAT would not break any applications, IPv6 would probably not happen for another 5 to 10 years. So rejoice!

paolo.franzoi
50%
50%
paolo.franzoi,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 4:58:56 PM
re: The Case Against Carrier-Grade NAT


 


I also believe he stated only 1 of the 2 use-cases for CGNAT and maybe I am using this term incorrectly but it is what we call it here.


The second problem is that IPv6 can not address IPv4 directly nor the other way around.  Many devices in the world are going to have to be "dual stacked".  This means that they run both IPv4 and IPv6 at the same time.  It also means that anybody who wants to address devices in both domains will require an IPv6 address as well as an IPv4 address.


THAT is the problem.  Who in their right mind wants to put their content on an IPv6 network if nobody can get to it.  When we have written about CGNAT in the past what I thought we were discussing is the notion of the ability of IPv4 devices to have a presence in the IPv6 world (and vice versa) via a carrier based translation service that (at my site at least) we call CGNAT.


What was being discussed here seems like an alternate strategy to address translation.  Which is to double NAT in the IPv4 domain.  That will not solve the other problem of switching content simultaneously to IPv6.  


seven


 

fgoldstein
50%
50%
fgoldstein,
User Rank: Light Sabre
12/5/2012 | 4:58:56 PM
re: The Case Against Carrier-Grade NAT


NAT is your friend.  It only breaks broken applications.


Point-of-attachment addresses don't belong in the application layer.

fgoldstein
50%
50%
fgoldstein,
User Rank: Light Sabre
12/5/2012 | 4:58:55 PM
re: The Case Against Carrier-Grade NAT


He was talking about 4-4 NAT, not 4-6 NAT.  I see no point to 4-6 NAT, 6-6 or anything else with a 6 in it.  Once you realize that v6 was and is an Epic Fail of massive proportions, it al starts to make sense.


The problems he cited were that some NATs add latency or have limited capacity.  That's a capacity engineering problem; buffering strategy is often a problem, since some folks insert too much.


 

paolo.franzoi
50%
50%
paolo.franzoi,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 4:58:55 PM
re: The Case Against Carrier-Grade NAT


 


Is your solution then to recover by force many of the IP address blocks that are wasted?  If we did that we could certainly delay IP address exhaust a LONG time.  Or are you suggesting we make an IPv7 which is completely different?


And I know he was only talking about double 4 NAT.  The problem is that this only solves one of the two huge hurdles on top of us.  Not the big one either.  Even if you are not happy with IPv6, then how about something more helpful than IPv6 sucks.


seven


 

rainbowarrior
50%
50%
rainbowarrior,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 4:58:54 PM
re: The Case Against Carrier-Grade NAT


I think BrooksSeven has a salient point.


With 84% of the current IPv4 address space completely unused, doesn't it make sense to just go through the administrative excersise of reclaiming and reallocating them? Isn't that easier than a compelete vertical and horizontal change to all applications, networking gear and back office systems that IPv6 requires?

fgoldstein
50%
50%
fgoldstein,
User Rank: Light Sabre
12/5/2012 | 4:58:54 PM
re: The Case Against Carrier-Grade NAT


Reclaiming space would buy a lot of time.  But the point is that client devices never belong on public IP address space.  The v4 address space should be used for gateways and public-facing servers.  Private nets should stay in net 10.


IPv4 addressing architecture is incomplete.  Applications should be addressed by name.  IPv6 does not fix this; it just makes for more wrong numbers, so to speak. As a stopgap (not to v6; as you might remember, I advocate RINA as the real answer), one should think about the "address" as being one 48-bit (IP+port (field, not as if they were separate layers. NAT gets this, but fundamentalists who believe old textbook descriptions of ARPANET protocols don't. And that's who wrote v6.


 

rainbowarrior
50%
50%
rainbowarrior,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 4:58:54 PM
re: The Case Against Carrier-Grade NAT


I think BrooksSeven has a salient point.


With 84% of the current IPv4 address space completely unused, doesn't it make sense to just go through the administrative excersise of reclaiming and reallocating them? Isn't that easier than a compelete vertical and horizontal change to all applications, networking gear and back office systems that IPv6 requires?

paolo.franzoi
50%
50%
paolo.franzoi,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 4:58:53 PM
re: The Case Against Carrier-Grade NAT


Okay, so I agree with your first paragraph (espeically if you read my comments to Carol).


I guess I am confused on how application addressing is going to help us with address exhaust.  At some level some switching/routing device must move packets along to the next stop.  Even if there is an application address, that name will not be unique per endpoint.  So, we would still have to resolve that application on that endpoint.  I think the idea of separating the addresses here is that you do not want to have to update the network to be able to introduce a new application.  You want the endpoints to be able to talk applications to each other while the network blithely shuffles packets between them.


Don't get me wrong, I am not thrilled with IPv6 but I think that is a ship that has sailed soon if we don't reclaim addresses.


seven


 

rainbowarrior
50%
50%
rainbowarrior,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 4:58:51 PM
re: The Case Against Carrier-Grade NAT


A lot of people in the network vendor and service provider community will say privately that IPv6 has already failed. The core protocols have been around for over 10 years with almost zero global adoption. V6 advocates say that this is because the industry is lazy, greedy, short-sighted and/or ignorant- but the other side of the coin is that a set of protocols that don't offer enough inherent value to make lazy, greedy, short-sighted people want to implement them don't deserve to be implemented.


A lot has changed since V6 was proposed back in the mid-90's. Is it time to write-off v6 and move on?


Can we start having an open and honest conversation about this? Or do we all have to politely pretend to be making the transition?

Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Flash Poll
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Sales Director of INIT on Plug & Play Switch Devices

9|19|14   |   3:21   |   (0) comments


INIT Italy uses both the Huawei S5700 and S7700 series switches for the campus LAN environment. Sales Director Andrea Curti says their company chose these Huawei devices over others because of their performance, flexible scalability and plug-and-play features.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Saudi Arabia Upgrades Vocational Training System

9|19|14   |   3:31   |   (0) comments


The Technical and Vocational Training Corporation (TVTC) has 100,000 students, 150 government-owned institutions and oversees 1000 private institutes. The CIO of TVTC explains that Huawei devices have allowed them to manage multiple datacenters using just one software program, scientifically tracking the progress of students and teachers, saving them millions.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Huawei's Media Solutions Are Here to Stay

9|19|14   |   4:35   |   (0) comments


The current media revolution requires rapid upgrades in technology. New formats (HD, 3D, 4K etc.) and the subsequent explosion of file sizes demand sophisticated network and storage architecture. Social media and the multiple distribution channels require a robust asset management system. Gartner analyst Venecia Liu speaks about the current technological trends in ...
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Microgenesis on Huawei's Switches

9|19|14   |   3:57   |   (0) comments


Microgenesis is a solutions and system integrator company in the Philippines whose areas of expertise include data centers, networking and security products. In this video, Executive Director Jeffrey Choa talks to us about his customers needs and they benefit from using Huawei switches.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
Network Solutions Help the Philippines Jump Ahead

9|17|14   |   2:59   |   (0) comments


In the past, the Philippines has under-invested in technology. Now, the CEO of Softshell talks about how Huawei products help the Philippines jump ahead as the economy improves.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
VCS Observation for Safer Cities in the Netherlands

9|17|14   |   5:20   |   (0) comments


Holland's VCS Observation has been operating for 22 years. Its main goal is to get cities safer. CEO Wim van Deijzen tells us some of the challenges his company faces and how Huawei is helping to overcome these challenges.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
A Conversation With Serbia's Ministry of Interior

9|17|14   |   4:38   |   (0) comments


At HCC 2014, the Assistant Minister of the Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Serbia talks to us about his projects and corporation with Huawei. Solutions like Safe City and E-Government and services like cloud computing are just some of the areas his department is interested in.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
IHS Analyst Discusses eLTE at CCW 2014

9|10|14   |   7:09   |   (0) comments


Thomas Lynch, associate director of critical communications at IHS Technology, talks about broadband in critical communications.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
TCAA on Huawei eLTE: A Broadband Solution for Mission-Critical Communications

9|10|14   |   2:29   |   (0) comments


At CCW2014 in Singapore, the TCCA's Phil Kidner talks about the importance of broadband data for critical communications.
LRTV Custom TV
Spotlight on Cisco: SDN for Optical Networks

9|8|14   |   9:27   |   (0) comments


Cisco's Greg Nehib talks OpenFlow and more on the 'Software-Defined Networking for Optical Networks' panel at the Big Telecom Event in June 2014.
LRTV Custom TV
Cisco's Evolved Programmable Network (EPN)

9|8|14   |   4:05   |   (0) comments


A look at the various demos Cisco showed at Light Reading's Big Telecom Event highlighting Cisco's EPN innovation and how SDN and NFV technologies are enabling a variety of new services.
LRTV Huawei Video Resource Center
The Future of Ultra-Broadband, With Kevin Kelly (UBBF2014)

9|5|14   |   1:13   |   (1) comment


If you think the technological changes we've seen up to now are astounding, just wait until you see what the future has in store. Discuss upcoming breakthroughs with Kevin Kelly, Founding Executive Editor of Wired Magazine, at the Huawei Ultra-Broadband Forum on September 24.
Upcoming Live Events!!
September 23, 2014, Denver, CO
October 29, 2014, New York City
November 6, 2014, Santa Clara
November 11, 2014, Atlanta, GA
December 2, 2014, New York City
December 3, 2014, New York City
December 9-10, 2014, Reykjavik, Iceland
June 9-10, 2015, Chicago, IL
Infographics
A survey conducted by Vasona Networks suggests that 72% of mobile users expect good performance all the time, and they'll blame the network operator when it's not up to par.
Today's Cartoon
Vacation Special Caption Competition Click Here
Latest Comment
Hot Topics
AT&T: We'll Bundle Fixed Wireless & DirecTV
Mari Silbey, Independent Technology Editor, 9/15/2014
New NFV Forum Focused on Interoperability
Carol Wilson, Editor-at-large, 9/16/2014
NFV & The Data Center: Top 10 Takeaways
Sarah Reedy, Senior Editor, 9/18/2014
Connecticut Cities Crowdsource Gigabit Nets
Jason Meyers, Senior Editor, Utility Communications/IoT, 9/15/2014
Pics: LR's Women in Telecom Breakfast
Sarah Reedy, Senior Editor, 9/16/2014
Like Us on Facebook
Twitter Feed