On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 11:39:19PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > I'm actually with Alexey on IPv6 <-> IPv6 masquerading. It's a horrible
> > hack. If your ISP gives you only a single IPv6 address then they really need
> > to be beaten with a the pointed end of a cluestick.
>
> Expect one address. They can charge lots extra for business service if
> you want several. Its about service differentiation not about cluesticks
No, that isn't the only driving force behind it.
(My ISP access hat on..)
Primary problem is that supplying dynamic addresses is
nice and easy, especially when dialup boxes are all
over the country behind routed IP network. Compare
that to STATIC addresses (or subnets), which would
end up at different call sites with each call,
a nightmare. Supplying static addresses at static
locations is possible, of course, but costs more at
the telephony network, than terminating all calls as
close to the callers as possible..
I have been talking with one hardware vendor about
supplying slightly different IPv6 dynamic pool
management, than what the IPv4 has.
For IPv4 there is typically pool base address, and
count of how many addresses are available starting
from it. (Or as syntax is at another machine, the
end-address of the address range.)
For IPv6 there could be an increment parameter (e.g.
"16") for the addresses, although I have not yet
figured how to use such dynamically allocated subnets..
There are addresses, but HOW can you use them ?
Renumber the network every time your dialup connector
hooks to the ISP ? (Ethernet auto-config doesn't
quite work unless you are supplied with /64 subnet,
while these things I have been playing with supply
just a /124 -- one of the reasons is that we want
to pre-supply IPv6 reversers for pool addresses.
That isn't quite so simple for /64 subnet...)
Single addresses are *so* much simpler...
> -
/Matti Aarnio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
