[182050] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Naslund, Steve)
Thu Jul 9 18:09:38 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Naslund, Steve" <SNaslund@medline.com>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 22:07:08 +0000
In-Reply-To: <op.x1i0aojitfhldh@rbeam.xactional.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Harald Koch <chk@pobox.com> wrote:
>> The "common man" is becoming much more sophisticated in their=20
>> networking requirements, and they need this stuff to just work.=20
>> Please don't place artificially small limits just because you can't see =
a need.
>>
>> Probably because he got good advise from his father :)
Agreed, we need to not add any limits or conventions to the v6 protocol. W=
hy commit to a /48 or /56 if the protocol offers many more options? Just w=
rite software to deal with all the possibilities.
While the "common man" has become much more sophisticated in network REQUIR=
EMENTS. They have probably become less KNOWLEDGEABLE about what those requi=
rement are because they are getting used to just plugging it in and it work=
s. Used to be that most Internet users knew if that had public/private or =
dynamic/static addresses because they had to. Today the most likely answer=
would be "who knows, I plugged in my Apple TV and it just worked"
Steven Naslund
