IPv6 Irony.

Masataka Ohta mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
Thu Oct 22 06:42:37 UTC 2015

Mark Andrews wrote:

>>> Customer support, especially network troubleshootings and so on...
>> Customer support for IPv6 costs a lot, at least because of:
>>     1) Unnecessarily lengthy IP addresses, not recognized by most, if not
>>        all, customers
>>     2) Lack of so promised automatic renumbering
> Upgrade the vendors.  Nodes already renumber themselves automatically
> when a new prefix appears.

Can the nodes treat multiple prefixes on multiple (virtual) interfaces
for smooth ISP handover?

> Nodes can update their addresses in the DNS if the want to securely
> using DNS UPDATE and TSIG / SIG(0).

How much is the customer support cost for the service?

> This isn't rocket science.  Firewall vendors could supply tools to
> allow nodes to update their addresses in the firewall.  They could
> even co-ordinate through a standards body.  It isn't that hard to
> take names, turn them into addresses and push out new firewall rules
> on demand as address associated with those names change.

As I and my colleague developed protocol suites to automatically
renumber multihomed hosts and routers

The Basic Procedures of Hierarchical Automatic Locator
Number Allocation Protocol HANA

which is now extended for DNS update including glue, I know it is

But, as it is a lot more simpler to do so with IPv4 with
NAT, 48 bit address space by NAT is large enough and NAT can
enjoy end to end transparency, I see no point to use IPv6 here.

Automatic renumbering of IPv6 *WAS* promising, because it was
not necessary to replace existing IPv4-only boxes.

						Masataka Ohta

More information about the NANOG mailing list