v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] (IPv6-MW)
mmc at internode.com.au
Thu Feb 5 04:38:53 UTC 2009
Apologies for that - wasn't meant to goto the list. Was a bit "frank".
On 05/02/2009, at 2:59 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
> Hi James,
> I don't think anyone really has done it large scale properly.
> I've had basically nothing from anyone.
> Given my knowledge of where most large BRAS/Cable vendors are upto -
> I don't think anyone could have. (Cisco won't have high end v6
> pppoe support until late this year!).
> There's a lot of people who clearly don't work for ISPs yammering on
> about the Zen of v6, but no one with real experience.
> Scary huh? I'm meant to have 250,000 customers running it by
> On 05/02/2009, at 2:44 PM, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
>> Hello Matthew , See way below ...
>> On Thu, 5 Feb 2009, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
>>> Scott Howard wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick at ianai.net
>>>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft <mmc at internode.com.au
>>>>> but my point was that people are starting to assume that v6 WILL
>>>>> static allocations for all customers.
>>>> By design IPv6 should mean _less_ static allocations than IPv4 -
>>>> in the
>>>> event that a client disconnects/reconnects and gets a new /64
>>>> then their
>>>> network *should* automatically handle that fact, with all clients
>>>> automagically renumbering themselves to the new /64, updating
>>>> DNS, etc.
>>>> Local communications won't be impacted as they should be using the
>>>> link-local address.
>>> As I asked before - I'm really keen to actually do this stuff -
>>> but all I get is people who haven't done it telling me theory and
>>> not how it works in practise in a real ISP of some scale. Telling
>>> customers "well, you might get renumbered randomly" isn't going to
>>> work, no matter what the theory about it all is. They do crazy
>>> and unexpected things and bleat about it even if you told them not
>>> to. At worse they stop paying you and leave!
>>> My hope is that PD will be used for the majority and statics will
>>> be small in number. My FEAR is that customers have already been
>>> conditioned that v6 will mean statics for everyone because v6 has
>>> so many! (This has already been the assumption many have made from
>>> the customer side).
>>>> The bit that isn't clear at the moment is if (and how well) that
>>>> actually work in practice. And that brings us back to the good
>>>> old catch-22
>>>> of ISPs not supporting IPv6 because consumer CPE doesn't support
>>>> it, and CPE
>>>> not supporting it because ISP don't...
>>> Tell me about it. As I asked before - has ANYONE done this
>>> before? ie. fully dualstacked to customers? Or is it still
>> Has Anyone responded to you on/off list with even a close
>> approximation of showing they have accomplished what you've
>> requested ?
>> I am beginning to be worried that no one [has|is willing to
>> divulge] that they have accomplished this . One would think that
>> someone would at least pipe up just for the bragging factor .
>> Twyl , JimL
>> | James W. Laferriere | System Techniques | Give me VMS |
>> | Network&System Engineer | 2133 McCullam Ave | Give me Linux |
>> | babydr at baby-dragons.com | Fairbanks, AK. 99701 | only on AXP |
> Matthew Moyle-Croft Internode/Agile Peering and Core Networks
> Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
> Email: mmc at internode.com.au Web: http://www.on.net
> Direct: +61-8-8228-2909 Mobile: +61-419-900-366
> Reception: +61-8-8228-2999 Fax: +61-8-8235-6909
Matthew Moyle-Croft Internode/Agile Peering and Core Networks
Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: mmc at internode.com.au Web: http://www.on.net
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909 Mobile: +61-419-900-366
Reception: +61-8-8228-2999 Fax: +61-8-8235-6909
More information about the NANOG