Scott Howard wrote:
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patr...@ianai.net>wrote:
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft <m...@internode.com.au>wrote:
but my point was that people are starting to assume that v6 WILL mean
static allocations for all customers.
By design IPv6 should mean _less_ static allocations than IPv4 - in the
event that a client disconnects/reconnects and gets a new /64 then their
network *should* automatically handle that fact, with all clients
automagically renumbering themselves to the new /64, updating DNS, etc.
Local communications won't be impacted as they should be using the
link-local address.
_should_
As I asked before - I'm really keen to actually do this stuff - but all
I get is people who haven't done it telling me theory and not how it
works in practise in a real ISP of some scale.
Telling customers "well, you might get renumbered randomly" isn't going
to work, no matter what the theory about it all is. They do crazy and
unexpected things and bleat about it even if you told them not to. At
worse they stop paying you and leave!
My hope is that PD will be used for the majority and statics will be
small in number. My FEAR is that customers have already been
conditioned that v6 will mean statics for everyone because v6 has so
many! (This has already been the assumption many have made from the
customer side).
The bit that isn't clear at the moment is if (and how well) that will
actually work in practice. And that brings us back to the good old catch-22
of ISPs not supporting IPv6 because consumer CPE doesn't support it, and CPE
not supporting it because ISP don't...
Tell me about it.
As I asked before - has ANYONE done this before? ie. fully
dualstacked to customers? Or is it still theory?
MMC
Scott.
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
Level 4, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: m...@internode.com.au Web: http://www.on.net
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909 Mobile: +61-419-900-366
Reception: +61-8-8228-2999 Fax: +61-8-8235-6909
