[125867] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [Re: http://tools.ietf.org/search/draft-hain-ipv6-ulac-01]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard Barnes)
Sun Apr 25 13:21:53 2010
In-Reply-To: <32096853-5736-40E5-8A8C-14684DA08E30@delong.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 13:21:16 -0400
From: Richard Barnes <richard.barnes@gmail.com>
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Moreover, the general point stands that Mark's problem is one of bad
ISP decisions, not anything different between IPv4/RFC1918 and IPv6.
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 25, 2010, at 8:17 AM, Tony Hoyle wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 25/04/2010 03:01, Mark Smith wrote:
>>> I'm a typical, fairly near future residential customer. I have a NAS
>>> that I have movies stored on. My ISP delegates an IPv6 prefix to me wit=
h
>>> a preferred lifetime of 60 minutes, and a valid lifetime of 90 minutes
>>
>> What ISP would put a 'lifetime' on your ipv6 prefix? =A0That seems insan=
e
>> to me... they should give you a /48 and be done with it. =A0Even the fre=
e
>> tunnel brokers do that.
>>
>> But then I never understood dynamic ipv4 either....
>>
> If they are using DHCP-PD, then, it comes with a lifetime whether it is
> static or not.
>
> The reality is that unless they need to renumber you, you'll probably get
> a new RA with the 60/90 minute lifetimes specified each time RAs are
> sent and your counters will all get reset to 60/90 for the foreseeable
> future. =A0The preferred and valid lifetimes aren't limitations, they're
> minimums. =A0The prefix should be yours and should be functional for
> you for AT LEAST the valid lifetime.
>
> Owen
>
>
>
