Definitive Guide to IPv6 adoption

Tue Oct 19 16:53:30 UTC 2010

-----Original Message-----
From: Jack Bates [mailto:jbates at brightok.net] 
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:12 PM
To: Franck Martin
Cc: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: Definitive Guide to IPv6 adoption

On 10/18/2010 3:51 PM, Franck Martin wrote:
> So they can't run their own services from home and have to request
premium connectivity from you?
>
> Beside the IPv4 scarcity mentality we have the Telco mentality to
fight...
>
> Happy days still ahead...
>

Of course they can run their own services at home. How does renumber 
effect that (outside of poor v6 implementations at this late stage)?

v6 is designed to support multiple prefixes and the ability to change 
from one prefix to another with limited disruption, especially if I give

24 hours to complete the transition.

If servers and services can't handle this, I'd say they need to improve,

or the customer will need a static allocation, which we may or may not 
charge for (depending on how automated we make it).

A sane default of rotation is appropriate for us, though, and no amount 
of fighting by anyone will make the Telco think that google or others 
have the right to track their users. It's unfair for our users who block

cookies, do due diligence to not be tracked, and then we throw them to 
the wolves with a constant trackable prefix.

	HS: Where customers = spammers?  The only folks I have seen ask
to do 'address rotation' have either been spammers or copyright
monitoring services.  I have never seen a request for 'address rotation'
to protect a customer from Google.  Wouldn't you just tell them not to
use Google's services?  The *typical* residential user doesn't know and
probably doesn't care whether their prefix is dynamic or static.  

	Dynamic allocation of address space was, in part, meant to help
conserve space - if the prefix was only needed for a couple hours, it
could in theory be released and reused... allowing more efficient
utilization of space.  Now though, with always-on connections and folks
wanting to access their content remotely - it makes sense to statically
allocate prefixes... and the availability of addresses in IPv6 gives us
the room to do this.  

Jack (knew this would start an argument. *sigh*)