ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IPv6 vs. Stupid NAT tricks: false dichotomy? (Was: Re: Stupid NAT tricks and how to stop them.)

2006-03-28 12:26:51
Scott Leibrand writes:

We definitely will have to see how it shapes up in the US.  In Japan,
where they actually have IPv6 deployed to end users, it looks like most
ISPs are giving out /64's to home users, and /48's to business users:

Looks like IPv6 will be exhausted even sooner than I predicted.

I doubt it.  There are RFC's (3177) and RIR policies
(http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six54) that *require* ISPs to
allocated a /64 or larger unless "it is absolutely known that one and only
one device is connecting."

See above.

So if I understand correctly, 99.99999999999999999% of the IPv6
address space has already been thrown away.  Why bother going to IPv6
at all?

What is "correct" rdns?  Is
adsl-066-156-091-129.sip.asm.bellsouth.net
"correct"?

The correct rDNS is the one that matches my domain.



_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>