IPv6 - real vs theoretical problems
mysidia at gmail.com
Thu Jan 6 19:04:20 CST 2011
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Deepak Jain <deepak at ai.net> wrote:
> Wouldn't a number of problems go away if we just, for now, follow the IPv4 lessons/practices like allocating the number of addresses a customer needs ---
> say /122s or /120s that current router architectures know how to handle -- to these boxes/interfaces today, while just reserving /64 or /56 spaces for
> each of them for whenever the magic day comes along where they can be used safely?
Trying to run the IPv6 network using IPv4 addressing practices is
similar to upgrading your horse and buggy
to a sports car, and insisting on driving this car only on dirt roads,
avoiding pavements at all costs, due to the danger
of slipping, if that was the lesson you learned with
horses and buggies.
You can probably do it, and survive, but that does not mean it will
be advantageous trouble free, advisable, or fun.
In this case, you will bring all the negatives (and more) that the
practice had with IPv4, for questionable or no advantages.
It is advisable to look for much stronger reasons than "With
IPv4 we did it" or With IPv4 we ran into such and such
problem" due to unique characteristics of IPv4 addressing
or other IPv4 conventions that had to continue to exist for
compatibility reasons, etc, etc.
More information about the NANOG