On Tue, 2 Nov 2010 01:24:45 -0400 Ben Jencks <b...@bjencks.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 00:58, David Conrad <d...@virtualized.org> wrote: > > On Nov 1, 2010, at 6:42 PM, Nathan Eisenberg wrote: > >>> My guess is that the millions of residential users will be less and > >>> less enthused with (pure) PA each time they change service providers... > >> That claim seems to be unsupported by current experience. Please > >> elaborate. > > > > Currently, most residential customers have PA+NATv4, where the CPE provides > > the public IPv4 address to the NATv4 box (which might be the same box as > > the CPE) via DHCP (or PPPoE). As such, all internal devices are shielded > > from all renumbering events. In a NATless PA world, all devices will need > > to be renumbered on a change of provider. While in theory, address > > lifetimes and multiple addresses should reduce the impact renumbering might > > have, I will admit some skepticism that renumbering IPv6 providers will be > > sufficiently transparent as customers are used to with IPv4 PA+NATv4. > > Perhaps I am wrong. > > No "average residential user" should ever see or configure an IPv6 > address; all the vendors are using zeroconf etc. to avoid it at all > costs. If it was all autoconfigured in the first place, there's no > reason autoconfiguration shouldn't be able to renumber it. > +1 > -Ben >
