Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

Dave Taht dave.taht at gmail.com
Thu Jul 9 03:48:26 UTC 2015


On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 7:49 PM, Karl Auer <kauer at biplane.com.au> wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-07-08 at 21:03 -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
>> I wasn't aware that residential users had (intentionally) multiple
>> layers of routing within the home.

No, what they often have is multiple layers of nat. I was at a hotel
once that had plugged in 12 APs, serially, wan, to lan, to wan, to
lan, to wan ports... because the Internet is a series of tubes, right?

> You, we, all of us have to stop using the present to limit the future.
> What IS should not be used to define what SHOULD BE.
>
> What people NOW HAVE in their homes should not be used to dictate to
> them what they CAN HAVE in their homes, which is what you do when you
> provide them only with non-globally-routable address space (IPv4 NAT),
> or too few subnets (IPv6 /56) to name just two examples.
>
> Multiple layers of routing might not be what is now in the home, but it
> doesn't take that much imagination to envision a future where there are
> hundreds, or even thousands of separate networks in the average home,
> some permanent, some ephemeral, and quite possibly all requiring
> end-to-end connectivity into the wider Internet. Taking into account
> just a few current technologies (virtual machines, car networks,
> personal networks, guest networks, entertainment systems) and
> fast-forwarding just a few years it's easy to imagine tens of subnets
> being needed - so it's not much of a leap to hundreds. And if we can
> already dimly see a future where hundreds might be needed, history tells
> us that there will probably be applications that need thousands.
>
> Unless of course we decide now that we don't WANT that. Then we should
> make it hard for it to happen by applying entirely arbitrary brakes like
> "/48 sounds too big to me, let's make it 1/256th of that."

In my case I have completely abandoned much of the debris of ipv4 and
ipv6 - using self assigned /128s and a mesh routing protocol
everywhere, giving up on multicast as we knew it, and all I need is
one /64 to route my (almost entirely wireless) world.

Somehow I doubt this will become a common option for others, but it
sure is easier than navigating the slew of standards, configuring
centralized services, and casting and configuring limited and highly
dynamic ipv6 subnets around.


> Regards, K.
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Karl Auer (kauer at biplane.com.au)
> http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer
> http://twitter.com/kauer389
>
> GPG fingerprint: 3C41 82BE A9E7 99A1 B931 5AE7 7638 0147 2C3C 2AC4
> Old fingerprint: EC67 61E2 C2F6 EB55 884B E129 072B 0AF0 72AA 9882
>
>



-- 
Dave Täht
worldwide bufferbloat report:
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat
And:
What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone?
https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast



More information about the NANOG mailing list