[75327] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Roesen)
Thu Nov 11 12:50:28 2004
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:46:57 +0100
From: Daniel Roesen <dr@cluenet.de>
To: nanog@Merit.edu
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@Merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20041111164457.162875D09@ptavv.es.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 08:44:57AM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> We have renumbered IPv6 space a couple of times when we were developing
> our addressing plan. (We have a /32.) Renumbering was pretty trivial for
> most systems, but servers requiring a fixed address were usually
> configured with an explicit prefix. This should not have been the case,
> but most people configured IPv6 addresses pretty much like IPv4 and
> specified the entire 128 bits. Of course, after a renumbering, this gets
> fixed, so those systems are usually OK the next time.
"specified the entire 128 bits"... how do you specify only part of
it? What determines the rest?
"fixed" as in "now using stateless autoconfig"? Fun... change NIC and
you need to change DNS. Thanks, but no thanks. Not for non-mobile
devices which need to be reachable with sessions initiated from remote
(basically: servers).
Best regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
