[143211] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jima)
Tue Aug 2 23:52:47 2011
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 21:50:53 -0600
From: Jima <nanog@jima.tk>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <042AB424-C9AF-4460-96D0-96FB2BB100D1@delong.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2011-08-02 11:17, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>
>> en1: flags=8863<UP,BROADCAST,SMART,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
>> ether 60:33:4b:01:75:85
>> inet6 fe80::6233:4bff:fe01:7585%en1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x5
>> inet 192.168.191.223 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.191.255
>> inet6 fd92:7065:b8e::6233:4bff:fe01:7585 prefixlen 64 autoconf
>> inet6 2001:470:1f00:820:6233:4bff:fe01:7585 prefixlen 64 autoconf
>> media: autoselect
>> status: active
>>
>> Note the multiple prefixes. IPv6 is not just IPv4 with bigger addresses.
>> If you want to give your printers, etc. stable IPv6 addesses use ULAs.
>>
>
> Icky.
>
>
> Better yet, just subscribe to an ISP that will give you a static prefix.
Well, judging by his prefixes, he does.
Also:
> Are you saying that a household that multihomes is abnormal? Perhaps
> today, but, not necessarily so in the future.
I technically multi-homed back in 2001-2004. I didn't have BGP or
anything; my DSL provider offered it to me half-jokingly once, but since
the other side (Time Warner Cable) wouldn't to it, I didn't take them up
on it.
Alas, I will maintain that any household that multi-homes at this
stage is, indeed, abnormal.
Jima
