[167147] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AT&T UVERSE Native IPv6, a HOWTO
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ricky Beam)
Mon Dec 2 18:45:48 2013
To: "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 18:45:28 -0500
From: "Ricky Beam" <jfbeam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BF3E1721-B641-464F-8A03-D1DC3DAF076B@delong.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 17:54:50 -0500, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
> I don't know why you think that the PC and Laptop can't talk to each
> other. It actually seems to work just fine. They both default to the
> upstream router and the router has more specifics to each of the two LAN
> segments.
You are confusing ROUTING with the WINDOWS FIREWALL (on by default)
Wired pinging Wireless will be dropped by the OS as foreign, unsolicited
traffic. (I see it often enough: A cannot talk to B because they're in
different networks.)
> Micr0$0ft doesn't have to make any assumptions at all. In the IPv6
> world, they can use site-scoped multicast (ffx5::).
People don't even know what link-local addresses are (and they don't cross
links.) Site-local (ULA) requires administrative configuration; no
machine, by default, will have a ULA address until manually configured
(i.e. they see an RA.)
> Frankly, if you're paying for IPv6 space, you're not too bright. You can
> go get a direct assignment from an RIR so easily for $100/year that it
> just doesn't make sense to pay more than that.
If you can justify it. A home user... good luck with that (a: getting the
space, and then b: getting Uverse, etc. to use it.) For a business, I
always say get your own space, unless you like re-numbering every time you
change providers. (we've done it 5 times in 10 years. 'tho none of them
have ever supported IPv6; shame on them.) [while "renumbering" the network
may be simple, changing the prefix(es) that have been recorded in various
systems is still a pain.]
