[134504] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NIST IPv6 document
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Bates)
Thu Jan 6 10:59:03 2011
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 09:57:20 -0600
From: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.1101061648080.13151@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 1/6/2011 9:52 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> In the DHCP case this is easy, yes.
>
> I perfer to have only LL on the link towards the customer operated CPE,
> thus I don't really need to keep lots of ND state per customer.
I use RBE and unnumbered vlans in most areas, which keeps some state,
but effectively prohibits the problem, as well as other problems. I have
vendors curse me for wanting the router to handle the security instead
of their DSLAMs, but then their DSLAMs often broke IPv6 with their so
called security.
Jack
