On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu> wrote:
On 26/Aug/15 16:13, Izaac wrote:
Yes, I'm curious about this too. I'd like a solid list of providers to avoid.
NAT64 is opt-in.
It will mostly be used for customers that can no longer obtain IPv4 addresses.
Service providers do not like NAT64 anymore than you do, but there needs to be some way to bridge both protocols in the interim.
What you should be more interested in is which service providers have deployed it at scale where it is not causing problems, as those are the ones you want to be connected to when the IPv4-hell hiteth the faneth!
Mark.
From largish deployment ...
Another relevant metric, less than 25% of my mobile subscribers traffic require NAT64 translating. 75+% of bits flows through end-to-end IPv6 (thanks Google/Youtube, Facebook, Netflix, Yahoo, Linkedin and so on ...).