mcn4 at leicester.ac.uk
Mon Dec 21 11:00:28 UTC 2015
On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 03:03:18PM +0100, Sander Steffann wrote:
> > The mix of having to do this crazy thing of gateway announcements
> > from one place, DNS from somewhere else, possibly auto-assigning
> > addresses from a router, but maybe getting them over DHCPv6. It's
> > just confusing and unnecessary and IMHO isn't helpful for
> > persuading people to move to IPv6. Especially when everyone
> > already understands DHCP in the v4 world.
> Have you ever tried to deploy IPv6 (even if only in a lab
> environment)? I have worked with several companies (ISP and
> enterprise) and once they stop thinking "I want to do everything
> in IPv6 in exactly the same way as I have always done in IPv4"
> and actually look at the features that IPv6 provides them they
> are usually much happier with IPv6 than they were with IPv4.
I've been running IPv6 for over 10 years. RAs and SLAAC. Doesn't
affect my previous comment. :)
IPv6 should by all means recommend certain technologies that are
"better" in an idealogical world. Not having one small feature
that makes it harder for people to deploy (for whatever the
reason) does't help the cause.
Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4 at le.ac.uk>
Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services,
I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp at le.ac.uk>
More information about the NANOG