On Jul 22, 2010, at 5:37 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote: > valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: >> On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 00:33:45 BST, Matthew Walster said: >> >> >>> I never saw the point of assigning a /48 to a DSL customer. Surely the >>> better idea would be to assign your bog standard residential DSL >>> customer a /64 and assign them a /56 or /48 if they request it, routed >>> to an IP of their choosing. >>> >> >> If they're using autoconfigure for IPv6 addresses, what happens if they want >> to >> share that connection? Giving them a /64 off the bat means that a very >> sizable >> fraction of your users are going to call. >> >> Phrased differently - how screwed would you be if you engineered your IPv4 >> network so the default was "one device only", and the customer had to call >> you >> and ask for a network config change because they wanted to hook up a $50 home >> wifi router? >> >> If it doesn't make sense for IPv4, why would you want to do it for IPv6? >> > "Home wifi router" vendors will do whatever it takes to make this work, so of > course in your scenario they simply implement NAT66 (whether or not IETF > folks think it is a good idea) however they see fit and nobody calls. > > Matthew Kaufman
Well, wouldn't it be better if the provider simply issued enough space to make NAT66 unnecessary? Owen
