[131029] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Definitive Guide to IPv6 adoption
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Tue Oct 19 12:53:40 2010
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 16:53:30 +0000
In-reply-to: <4CBCB824.9050905@brightok.net>
From: "Schiller, Heather A (HeatherSkanks)"
<heather.schiller@verizonbusiness.com>
To: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Jack Bates [mailto:jbates@brightok.net]=20
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:12 PM
To: Franck Martin
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Definitive Guide to IPv6 adoption
On 10/18/2010 3:51 PM, Franck Martin wrote:
> So they can't run their own services from home and have to request
premium connectivity from you?
>
> Beside the IPv4 scarcity mentality we have the Telco mentality to
fight...
>
> Happy days still ahead...
>
Of course they can run their own services at home. How does renumber=20
effect that (outside of poor v6 implementations at this late stage)?
v6 is designed to support multiple prefixes and the ability to change=20
from one prefix to another with limited disruption, especially if I give
24 hours to complete the transition.
If servers and services can't handle this, I'd say they need to improve,
or the customer will need a static allocation, which we may or may not=20
charge for (depending on how automated we make it).
A sane default of rotation is appropriate for us, though, and no amount=20
of fighting by anyone will make the Telco think that google or others=20
have the right to track their users. It's unfair for our users who block
cookies, do due diligence to not be tracked, and then we throw them to=20
the wolves with a constant trackable prefix.
HS: Where customers =3D spammers? The only folks I have seen ask
to do 'address rotation' have either been spammers or copyright
monitoring services. I have never seen a request for 'address rotation'
to protect a customer from Google. Wouldn't you just tell them not to
use Google's services? The *typical* residential user doesn't know and
probably doesn't care whether their prefix is dynamic or static. =20
=09
Dynamic allocation of address space was, in part, meant to help
conserve space - if the prefix was only needed for a couple hours, it
could in theory be released and reused... allowing more efficient
utilization of space. Now though, with always-on connections and folks
wanting to access their content remotely - it makes sense to statically
allocate prefixes... and the availability of addresses in IPv6 gives us
the room to do this. =20
Jack (knew this would start an argument. *sigh*)
