[ipv6-wg] Simulation of the future IPv4 world at RIPE meetings?

On Thursday 24 September 2009 17:44:38 Marco Hogewoning wrote:
> On 24 sep 2009, at 16:30, Kostas Zorbadelos wrote:
> > If a /24 is used for NAT, considering the size of RIPE meetings, I
> > guess
> > nobody will notice anything inconvenient.
>
> It's a 1 in 3 mapping if you count heads, I guess devices is 1 on 5 :)
> If you think this won't raise any issues I guess the world in general
> doesn't have a problem, we can simply extend the IPv4 space by a
> multiple of 5 :P
>

I didn't say there are no issues, I said the people will not feel 
inconvenient.

> Even if open ports wouldn't be an issue, think of:
>
> - inbound connections (people using VOIP)

There are ugly ways to address this (eg ALG).
 
> - VPN to connect back home (meeting is still providing fixed IP for
> that purpose)

I have used openVPN in a NAT environment without problems.
 
> - CPU load
> - traceability (Pentagon got hacked by somebody at RIPE-XX)
>

:-D

Don't get me wrong, I am a proponent of IPv6 and I hate NAT. But unfortunately 
all those ugly solutions keep IPv4 running, who knows for how long more.

Regards,

Kostas  

> Groet,
>
> MarcoH