owen at delong.com
Tue Mar 25 06:32:11 UTC 2014
On Mar 24, 2014, at 10:12 PM, Alexander Lopez <alex.lopez at opsys.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 24, 2014, at 9:36 AM, Alexander Lopez <alex.lopez at opsys.com>
>>> not to mention the cost in readdressing your entire network when you
>> change an upstream provider.
>>> Nat was a fix to a problem of lack of addresses, however, the use of
>> private address space 10/8, 192.168/16 has allowed many to enjoy a simple
>> network addressing scheme.
>> This is easily and better solved in IPv6 using provider independent addressing
>> which is readily available.
> Yes but the number of people needing just a /64 will far outnumber the one requesting a /48.
Businesses? I doubt it.
> I would say that the majority of users today and for the future will not require a /48, but will simply use the allocation given to them by their upstream.
Perhaps, but I don’t see that being just one subnet for anyone at all likely to have a concern about renumbering.
> Many today do not multi-home and how many SMB customers just use a single Public IP behind a NAT device?
Those wouldn’t really have a problem renumbering their network.
> It is easy for us on this list to use or request PIA, but what about the 10 person office?
I’ve done so for several. It’s not hard or expensive.
More information about the NANOG