[Re: http://tools.ietf.org/search/draft-hain-ipv6-ulac-01]

Richard Barnes richard.barnes at gmail.com
Sun Apr 25 12:21:16 CDT 2010

Moreover, the general point stands that Mark's problem is one of bad
ISP decisions, not anything different between IPv4/RFC1918 and IPv6.

On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> On Apr 25, 2010, at 8:17 AM, Tony Hoyle wrote:
>> Hash: SHA1
>> On 25/04/2010 03:01, Mark Smith wrote:
>>> I'm a typical, fairly near future residential customer. I have a NAS
>>> that I have movies stored on. My ISP delegates an IPv6 prefix to me with
>>> a preferred lifetime of 60 minutes, and a valid lifetime of 90 minutes
>> What ISP would put a 'lifetime' on your ipv6 prefix?  That seems insane
>> to me... they should give you a /48 and be done with it.  Even the free
>> tunnel brokers do that.
>> But then I never understood dynamic ipv4 either....
> If they are using DHCP-PD, then, it comes with a lifetime whether it is
> static or not.
> The reality is that unless they need to renumber you, you'll probably get
> a new RA with the 60/90 minute lifetimes specified each time RAs are
> sent and your counters will all get reset to 60/90 for the foreseeable
> future.  The preferred and valid lifetimes aren't limitations, they're
> minimums.  The prefix should be yours and should be functional for
> you for AT LEAST the valid lifetime.
> Owen

More information about the NANOG mailing list