Owen DeLong owen at
Tue Dec 3 03:03:59 UTC 2013

On Dec 2, 2013, at 18:20 , Ricky Beam <jfbeam at> wrote:

> On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 20:27:36 -0500, Owen DeLong <owen at> wrote:
>>> They could be do much worse... if you throw out SLAAC, your network(s) can be smaller than /64.  I don't want to give them any ideas, but Uverse could use their monopoly on routers to make your lan a DHCP only /120.
>> I think if they did that, they'd do more to evaporate Uverse customers than to change the world of IPv6 routing at this point.
> I'd like to see the results of such an experiment. I suspect 90% of their users wouldn't even notice. (given how many don't even realize IPv6 is on, until some site(s) run dog slow until they're told (how) to turn IPv6 off.)
> Not counting MAC users, because they cannot do DHCPv6 without 3rd party software.

My Macs seem to do DHCPv6 just fine here without third party software, so I'm not sure what you are talking about.

> Nobody really cared with they limited what RFC1918 space you could use. (not sure they're still doing that.)

Not sure what you mean here since RFC-1918 is IPv4 only.


More information about the NANOG mailing list