[ipv6hackers] Is there a telecom company which adpated IPv6 network on LTE?

[Joe Klein]

You are missing the big disadvantages to NAT, from a business prospective
in no order:

- it increases the cost to implement and maintaining the network

- provides a false sense of security, as most attacks today are indirect

- makes it harder to model security defense

- prone to errors (increase in device and network outages)

- limits and extends the time for end-to-end visibility to identify DDOS
and attack sources

- Increases power utilization and heat dissipate of every device between
each end

- decreases battery life expediency, for mobile or portable devices

- limits the ability to offer advance security features to customers as a
service

- inability to apply resilient and/or ruggedized security features

- harder to implement 'big data' analytics against network traffic and feeds

- Creates another point of DDOS

- Increases jitter and *latency* for VOIP, Video and other Real Time
protocols

- Increased both OPeX and CAPX, based on Metcalfe Law

- the value of a telecommunications
network<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_network>
 is proportional to the
square<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratic_growth> of
the number of connected users of the system (*n*2))

- strong indicator that the vendor of choose has it’s own best interest in
mind (sell more boxes), over the interest of the ISP or end customers –
Game Theory (Stag Hunt)

- reduces the *Agility** *of the organization to respond to market changes

- requires larger government subsidies (handouts) to maintain profitability

- Increases logging costs of all NATs to abide by law enforcement logging
rules

I have many more, but don't have time to complete the list, time to get
back to work...

 Joe Klein



On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Tor Houghton <torh-ipv6hackers at bogus.net>wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 12:23:12PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> >
> > Marco,
> >
> > In the context of a defense in depth approach, please define what
> > attack surface NAT is helping you defend.
> >
>
> The other downside to NAT, from a provider perspective, is that it is
> fairly
> easy to lose track of someone, say in an abuse scenario, if you don't have
> the ability to "follow" the translation (and even then it is likely
> impossible due to NAT overload).
>
> Tor
> _______________________________________________
> Ipv6hackers mailing list
> Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com
> http://lists.si6networks.com/listinfo/ipv6hackers
>