NANOG 40 agenda posted

Tue May 29 09:39:12 UTC 2007

I don't really agree 100%. There is DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation, and it just
works !

Regards,
Jordi

> De: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch at muada.com>
> Responder a: <owner-nanog at merit.edu>
> Fecha: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:46:47 +0200
> Para: Donald Stahl <don at calis.blacksun.org>
> CC: Jeroen Massar <jeroen at unfix.org>, "Steven M. Bellovin"
> <smb at cs.columbia.edu>, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>, Martin Hannigan
> <hannigan at gmail.com>, <nanog at nanog.org>
> Asunto: Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted
> 
> 
> On 29-mei-2007, at 3:35, Donald Stahl wrote:
> 
>> Actually setting up a dual-stack infrastructure isn't very difficult-
>> anyone who has done so would probably agree. The problems (as has
>> already been pointed out) come from management, billing and the like.
> 
> I don't know what kinds of weird management and billing systems are
> out there, so I won't say that's not relevant, but the most difficult
> part about IPv6 deployment today is provisioning, in my opinion. If
> you as a service provider have a router and a customer has a host (or
> more than one for either) then you can do stateless autoconfig and
> life is good. However, when the customer has a router then there is
> no way to make that work automatically without manual configuration
> similar to what you get now with a CPE that receives a single IPv4
> address over PPP or DHCP on the WAN side and does NAT on the LAN side.
> 
> Then there is the DNS issue: since you can't predict what addresses
> your customer's machines are going to have, you can't pre-populate
> the DNS. DHCP for IPv6 is largely missing in action so that's not a
> 100% solution. It is possible to have clients register their
> addresses in the DNS using dynamic DNS updates, but that's not all
> that widely supported either and either you have no security or you
> have confused customers. But you can always delegate the reverse DNS
> to the customer and make it their problem.  :-)
> 
>> Testing now with a small group of technically competent people
>> would seem to be a better idea than waiting until IPv6 is already
>> widely deployed and then trying to test a rollout.
> 
> # traceroute6 www.nanog.org
> traceroute6: hostname nor servname provided, or not known
> 
> That would be a start... It took years to get the IETF to eat its own
> dog food, though.

**********************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !
http://www.ipv6day.org

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.