[131714] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 fc00::/7 - Unique local addresses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Conrad)
Tue Nov 2 00:58:45 2010
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <8C26A4FDAE599041A13EB499117D3C285EC69ED6@ex-mb-1.corp.atlasnetworks.us>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 18:58:37 -1000
To: Nathan Eisenberg <nathan@atlasnetworks.us>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
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.
Regards,
-drc
