On Thu, 5 Sep 2019, Ray Hunter (v6ops) wrote:
IMHO Expected behavior. Many European data protection people consider an
IP(v6) address to be privacy-sensitive personal data. That will likely
mean regular renumbering of IA PD by ISP's as the norm rather than the
exception.
This is the first ti
Ted Lemon wrote on 05/09/2019 18:31:
On Sep 2, 2019, at 1:47 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
Assuming that the prefix change is make-before-break (which we do not clearly
know how to do on the WAN side, I think), then the web server should
configure with the same rfc7212 IID, but a new prefix.
On Sep 2, 2019, at 1:58 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Question: do PCP messages always go to the default route? I re-read 6887 and
> that was unclear. RFC7488 did not clarify for me.
PCP requests go to the PCP server the client chooses. PCP servers can
currently only be advertised using DHC
On 05/09/2019 14:45, Ray Hunter (v6ops) wrote:
> That will likely mean regular renumbering of IA PD by ISP's as the norm
> rather than the exception.
I get a bit of both. If there's a power outage or some other
kinds of service outage I don't get, then I get renumbered
when some bit of ISP kit r
mal.hub...@bt.com wrote on 02/09/2019 17:55:
Hey,
Mal here. IETF attendee since 2012 ;)
I have a home networking question with respect to IPv6 standards, I’m
hoping to use you as a sounding board first before I take it to v6ops.
The scenario here is a home / soho network situation where t