How to wish you hadn't forced ipv6 adoption (was "How to force rapid ipv6 adoption")
owen at delong.com
Sun Oct 4 03:19:01 UTC 2015
> On Oct 3, 2015, at 14:01 , William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Scott Morizot <tmorizot at gmail.com> wrote:
>> One of the points in having 64 bits reserved for the host
>> portion of the address is that you never need to think or worry about
>> individual addresses
> Well, that turned out to be a farce. Instead of worrying about running
> out of addresses on the lan, you have to worry about other people
> tracking your mobile users through their static 64 bit tail (SLAAC) or
> having trouble internally tracking your users (privacy extensions).
> Give me the straightforward problem over the subtle one any time.
Both of these are solved through network-hashed persistent IPv6 privacy addresses.
More information about the NANOG