using "reserved" IPv6 space
mysidia at gmail.com
Tue Jul 17 04:18:37 UTC 2012
On 7/16/12, -Hammer- <bhmccie at gmail.com> wrote:
> hurdles. Example? HSRP IPv6 global addressing on Cisco ASR platform. If
HSRP is a legacy proprietary protocol; try VRRP. Stateless
autoconfig and router advertisements can obviate (eliminate/reduce)
the need in many cases; albeit, with a longer failure recovery
> this morning from CheckPoint for NAT66. This should have been ready for
> prime time years ago. I guess the vendors weren't getting the push from
NAT66; you're talking about something that is not a mainline feature,
an experimental proposition; RFC6296 produced in 2011. Very few
IPv6 deployments should require prefix translation or any kind of NAT
technology with IPv6, other than the IPv4 transition technologies.
So... NO.. they should not have had this ready "for prime time" years ago.
There are other things they should have been working on, such as
getting the base IPv6 implementation correct, V6 connectivity,
V6-enabled protocols, support for the newer RA/DHCPv6 options, and
support for the newer more fully baked IPv4 transition specs such as
6to4, NAT-PT, and bugfixing.
I'll take the stable platform, that has the standards-specified
features, over one with bells and whistles, and the latest
experimental draft features such as 6to6, that are not required to
deploy IPv6, thanks.
More information about the NANOG