<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 4:51 PM Michael Thomas <<a href="mailto:mike@mtcc.com">mike@mtcc.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p><br>
</p>
<div>On 9/29/21 1:09 PM, Victor Kuarsingh
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 3:22
PM Owen DeLong <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com" target="_blank">owen@delong.com</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<blockquote type="cite">On Sep 29, 2021, at 09:25,
Victor Kuarsingh <<a href="mailto:victor@jvknet.com" target="_blank">victor@jvknet.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Sep 29,
2021 at 10:55 AM Owen DeLong via NANOG <<a href="mailto:nanog@nanog.org" target="_blank">nanog@nanog.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="ltr">Use SLAAC, allocate prefixes
from both providers. If you are using
multiple routers, set the priority of the
preferred router to high in the RAs. If
you’re using one router, set the preferred
prefix as desired in the RAs. </div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Owen</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I agree this works, but I assume that we
would not consider this a consumer level
solution (requires an administrator to make it
work). It also assumes the local network policy
allows for auto-addressing vs. requirement for
DHCP. </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
It shouldn’t require an administrator if there’s just one
router. If there are two routers, I’d say we’re beyond the
average consumer. </div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In the consumer world (Where a consumer has no idea who
we are, what IP is and the Internet is a wireless thing they
attach to). </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I am only considering one router (consumer level stuff).
Here is my example:</div>
<div>- Mr/Ms/Ze. Smith is a consumer (lawyer) wants to work
from home and buy a local cable service and/or DSL service,
and/or xPON service</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Isn't the easier (and cheaper) thing to do here is just use a VPN
to get behind the corpro firewall? Or as is probably happening
more and more there is no corpro network at all since everything
is outsourced on the net for smaller companies like your law firm.</p></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>For shops with IT departments, sure that can make sense. For many mom/pop setups, maybe less likely. The challenge for us (in this industry) is that we need to address not just the top use cases, but the long tail as well (especially in this new climate of more WFH).</div><div><br></div><div>regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Victor K</div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><p>
<br>
</p>
<p>The use cases that stuck in my mind for the justification for the
need for routing was for things like Zigbee and other low power
networks where you want them isolated from the chatter of the
local lan. Not saying that I agree with the justification, but
that was it iirc.<br>
</p>
<p>Mike<br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote></div></div>