ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: ITU-T Dubai Meeting

2012-08-07 10:06:11

On Aug 7, 2012, at 5:32 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote:

From: mrex(_at_)sap(_dot_)com (Martin Rex)

To me, IPv6 PA prefixes look like a pretty useless feature (from the
customer perspective). 

Far be it from me to defend IPv6, but... I don't see the case here.

Our house is pretty typical of the _average_ consumer - we have a provider
suppplied PA address (IPv4, but the principles are the same), which they seem
to change on a fairly regular basis as they renumber/reorganize their
network. However, as we don't run any servers/services, we don't care. Thanks
to the magic of DHCP, etc, everything 'just works'. So for the _average_
customer (who are 99.9...% of their customers), PA is just fine.

If home automation systems become more commonplace, having a "server" at home 
may also become more commonplace. What's the point of having an IPv6-enabled 
lightbulb if you can't turn it off from half-way around the world?  

But as long as DNS updates dynamically, this shouldn't be a problem. 

For organizations renumbering is more painful, but as long as there's plenty of 
time to prepare - it should be manageable. If it's too painful, there are 
provider independent addresses, but how many really need them?

Yoav

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