Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day
marka at isc.org
Mon Jun 6 01:14:11 UTC 2011
In message <BANLkTimGkuL7ycrYG6kTC1U7OWis9dOA+YaV-YHwr+5C8=0Pxw at mail.gmail.com>
, =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgTmljb2xsZQ==?= writes:
> 2011/6/6 Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org>:
> > There is no reason that they can't do a similar thing to move
> > customers who are doing things that break with LSN out from behind
> > the LSN.
> Oh, you're right, they'll surelly do that. But not in time, and not for fre=
Well here in Australia I would be calling the ACCC is a ISP tried
to charge extra for a address that is not behind a LSN. As for in
time it should be in place before they turn on LSN. If you can
adjust port 25 filters whenever a customer gets a new address you
can also ensure that they get address from the correct pool when
they connect to the network. This really isn't rocket science.
It's updating the provisioning database from a web form and generating
new configs based on that database. Yes there is some work required
to ensure that this gets done properly and there needs to be checks
that address pools are appropriately sized.
If I were doing it I would also have checkboxes for some of the
more common reasons and include IPv6 connectivity as one then have
a 6 month grace period once the ISP offers IPv6 connectivity before
removing that as a valid reason for needing a address that is not
behind the LSN.
> LSN is beeing actively implemented in the core network of several
> ISPs, and most didn't yet consider it as optional. Nor are ready for
> v6 connectivity to residential customers, though.
> For users behind a forced NAT (no way to disable it on the CPE) or
> LSN, the only way out is still tunneling. Talking about bandwidth and
> infrastructure waste...
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka at isc.org
More information about the NANOG