[ipv6-wg] Belgian limits on CGN/NAT?

On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Marco Hogewoning wrote:

> So far we have not yet been able to retrieve a copy of this Code of 
> Conduct or a list of participating operators and would be happy to 
> receive more information. But as the text suggests that there is an 
> agreement between Belgian network operators and the government that 
> would limit the use of CGN to 16 users per address. We wonder then, if 
> this is the “magic ingredient” of why the IPv6 roll out in Belgium is so 
> successful.

I don't see a connection between a CoC for CGN sizing would have an impact 
on IPv6 deployment.

A CoC that spells out that IPv6 is important and that the government 
expects this, and tells all the upper management of ISPs that this is the 
case, that might help.

I think the reason Belgium is so big on IPv6 is that (and I might be 
wrong, but this is the impression I have from talking to people with 
insight) is that PPPoE is widely used, ISPs provide gateways that people 
use in homesm and there are a few large players. This means it's fairly 
easy to deploy IPv6.

> As a question to this Working Group, would a 16:1 ratio be realistic and 
> workable from an operational perspective? And further of course, do you

Well, 16:1 makes a lot of sense, I'd say sensible is somewhere between 
16:1 and 64:1. Port ranges should be used to make logging less of a 
problem, and that means you allocate 1024, 2048 or 4096 ports per user as 
a block at once.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se