bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:22:52AM +1300, Perry Lorier wrote:
You could imagine extending this to other services such as NTP, but I'm
not sure that you really would want to go that far, perhaps using DNS to
lookup "_ntp._udp.local IN SRV" or similar to fi
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 11:03 -0400, Kevin Loch wrote:
> > If, on the other hand, the REAL desire is to have a DHCP server break
> > the tie in the selection between several routers that advertise their
> > presence, that wouldn't be unreasonable.
>
> In some configurations not all hosts are suppo
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:12:14AM +1100, Karl Auer wrote:
> > To work around this problem, some DHCPv6 software implementers have
> > elected to temporarily apply a fixed /64 bit prefix to all applied
> > addresses until a prefix length can be made available in-band through
> > some means. This d
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 22 okt 2009, at 22:52, Mark Smith wrote:
Seriously, we're all adults. So treating us like children and
taking away the power tools is not appreciated.
Stop trying to break the internet and I'll treat you like an adult.
Great way to shoot down your own cr
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 16:16 -0700, David W. Hankins wrote:
> Unless of course it can fall back on native IPv4, or has entered a
> bogus covering /64.
I think it was really this that I was wanting more info on. "Entered"
where?
Sorry to be obtuse, clearly I am missing something obvious.
Regards,
Ray Soucy wrote:
Others may have their specific requests from vendors, but here are mine:
1. Include DHCPv6 client functionality as part of any IPv6 implementation.
2. Support RA-gaurd and DHCPv6 snooping in L2 network infrastructure.
I can agree with that.
I would also add that there is
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 10:25:10AM +1100, Karl Auer wrote:
> I think it was really this that I was wanting more info on. "Entered"
> where?
On the address configured on the interface typically, or whatever
other system specifical local means are used to enter a route for the
prefix for the interfa
trej...@gmail.com wrote:
WRT "Anycast DNS"; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation and load
balancing reasons. The draft suggested using :::1 I
personally would suggest getting a well known ULA-C allocation assigned
to
On Oct 22, 2009, at 4:12 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 11:03 -0400, Kevin Loch wrote:
If, on the other hand, the REAL desire is to have a DHCP server
break
the tie in the selection between several routers that advertise
their
presence, that wouldn't be unreasonable.
In some
On Oct 22, 2009, at 4:27 PM, Joe Maimon wrote:
Ray Soucy wrote:
Others may have their specific requests from vendors, but here are
mine:
1. Include DHCPv6 client functionality as part of any IPv6
implementation.
2. Support RA-gaurd and DHCPv6 snooping in L2 network infrastructure.
I
On Oct 22, 2009, at 5:00 PM, Perry Lorier wrote:
trej...@gmail.com wrote:
WRT "Anycast DNS"; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation and
load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using :::1
I personally would suggest
WRT "Anycast DNS"; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation and
load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using :::1 I
personally would suggest getting a well known ULA-C allocation
assigned to IANA, then use :::1
:::2 a
> WRT "Anycast DNS"; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
Needs an acronym ... off the top of my head, something like ASPEN -
Anycast Service Provisioning for Enterprise Networks ... ?
(Although it could be appropriate for an ISP-HomeUser as well ... hmmm,
SPATULA - Service Provisio
Owen DeLong wrote:
On Oct 22, 2009, at 4:27 PM, Joe Maimon wrote:
NAT wasnt a component of IPv4 until it was already had widespread
adoption. I remain completely unconvinced that people will not
continue to perceive value in PAT6 between their private and their
public subnets.
People may
On Oct 23, 2009, at 5:08 AM, Perry Lorier wrote:
WRT "Anycast DNS"; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation
and load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using
:::1 I personally would suggest getting a well known
U
>
> I figured was a good candidate since it's already partially in use
>> for
>> reserved special addresses.
>
>
But in a totally non-routable fashion, as it stands today.
ULA's have the immediate benefit of being routable, but not globally so -
and (hopefully) already being in filter lists t
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> This would be a big mistake. Fate sharing between the device that
> advertises the presence of a router and the device that forwards packets
> makes RAs much more robust than DHCPv4.
No, what we want are better first hop redundancy protocols, and DHCP for
v6, so that
>> This would be a big mistake. Fate sharing between the device that
>> advertises the presence of a router and the device that forwards packets
>> makes RAs much more robust than DHCPv4.
> No, what we want are better first hop redundancy protocols, and DHCP for
> v6, so that everyone who has extra
Amen to that Randy.
MMC
Randy Bush wrote:
This would be a big mistake. Fate sharing between the device that
advertises the presence of a router and the device that forwards packets
makes RAs much more robust than DHCPv4.
No, what we want are better first hop redundancy protocols, and DH
This is unusual, but, I have to agree with Randy here.
Owen
On Oct 28, 2009, at 5:09 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
Amen to that Randy.
MMC
Randy Bush wrote:
This would be a big mistake. Fate sharing between the device that
advertises the presence of a router and the device that forwards
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:40:46 +0900
Randy Bush wrote:
> >> This would be a big mistake. Fate sharing between the device that
> >> advertises the presence of a router and the device that forwards
> >> packets makes RAs much more robust than DHCPv4.
> > No, what we want are better first hop redundan
Vasil Kolev , 2009-10-22 21:03 (+0200):
> how should we provide DNS and other useful information for the V6 only
> people?
What Router Advertisment server did you use? The radvd server supports
RFC 5006, an extension to vanilla RA that gives an address to a
resolving DNS server (RDNSS).
Granted,
Ricardo,
I know from previous discussions on this list that Android phones are
looking for DHCPD leases and not /128's or /64's. From what I remember
this is due to the current requirement for multiple ipv6 subnets for
various applications (vpns among others) to function correctly. As a
result G
NANOG
Subject: Re: IPv6 Deployment for Mobile Subscribers
Ricardo,
I know from previous discussions on this list that Android phones are
looking for DHCPD leases and not /128's or /64's. From what I remember
this is due to the current requirement for multiple ipv6 subnets for
various applicati
On Friday, July 22, 2016, Ricardo Ferreira
wrote:
> Is there anyone here working in an ISP where IPv6 is deployed?
> We are starting to plan the roll-out IPv6 to mobile subscribers (phones) I
> am interesting in knowing the mask you use for the assignment; whether it
> is /64 or /128.
>
> In RFC
Good day,
On 22 Jul 2016, at 10:54, Ricardo Ferreira wrote:
> Is there anyone here working in an ISP where IPv6 is deployed?
I am not, but I can answer from the consumer's point of view:
> Basically a sole device will be connecting to the internet so I am
> wondering if this rule is follwed.
T
Den 22. jul. 2016 20.25 skrev "Ca By" :
> Phones, as in 3gpp? If so, each phone alway gets a /64, there is no
choice.
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6459
Here the cell companies are marketing their 4G LTE as an alternative to
DSL, Coax and fiber for internet access in your home with a 4G wifi
on behalf of Baldur Norddahl
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 4:10:41 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: IPv6 Deployment for Mobile Subscribers
Den 22. jul. 2016 20.25 skrev "Ca By" :
> Phones, as in 3gpp? If so, each phone alway gets a /64, there is no
choice.
>
> https://tools
* Baldur Norddahl
> Den 22. jul. 2016 20.25 skrev "Ca By" :
>
> > Phones, as in 3gpp? If so, each phone alway gets a /64, there is
> > no choice.
> >
> > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6459
>
> Here the cell companies are marketing their 4G LTE as an alternative
> to DSL, Coax and fiber for in
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 10:54:48 +0200, Ricardo Ferreira said:
> Is there anyone here working in an ISP where IPv6 is deployed?
> We are starting to plan the roll-out IPv6 to mobile subscribers (phones) I
> am interesting in knowing the mask you use for the assignment; whether it
> is /64 or /128.
>
>
RFC 6177:
This document obsoletes RFC 3177, updating its recommendations in the
following ways:
1) It is no longer recommended that /128s be given out. While
there may be some cases where assigning only a single address
may be justified, a site, by definition, impli
Dear colleagues,
The RIPE NCC would like to invite you to participate in its Global IPv6
Survey 2018. The goal of the survey is to get an overview IPv6
deployment across the world, and to assess how this is seen from the
perspective of ISPs and Enterprise users.
The 2018 survey is a follow up
Hi,
just a little reminder that there are a few days left to help the RIPE
NCC by filling up our Global IPv6 Deployment Survey. We have already
received a considerable amount of responses, but would like to hear from
more people.
The goal of the survey is to get an overview of IPv6 deployment
> >> WRT "Anycast DNS"; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
> > You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation and
> > load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using :::1
FWIW - I think simple anycast fits that bill.
> > I personally would suggest getting a well kno
TJ wrote:
WRT "Anycast DNS"; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation and
load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using :::1
FWIW - I think simple anycast fits that bill.
I think for very small/small
WRT "Anycast DNS"; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
>
>
You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation and
load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using :::1
>>>
>> FWIW - I think simple anycast fits that bill.
>>
>>
>>
> I think for very
On Oct 23, 2009, at 5:45 AM, TJ wrote:
WRT "Anycast DNS"; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53?
You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation
and
load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using
:::1
FWIW - I think simple anycast fits that bill.
I th
Once upon a time, Owen DeLong said:
> Please remember that IPv6 DNS is OFTEN not stateless as the replies
> are commonly too large for UDP.
Anything that supports IPv6 _should_ also support EDNS0.
--
Chris Adams
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anyb
I think for very small/small networks anycast requires a lot of overhead
and understanding. If your big enough to do anycast and/or loadbalancing
it's not hard for you to put all three addresses onto one device.
Anycast isn't really hard - same address, multiple places, routers see wha
gt;Cc: Tore Anderson; nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: Re: IPv6 deployment excuses
>
>
>In message c2ae05bcc...@rivervalleyinternet.net>, Matt Hoppes writes:
>> I disagree. Any data center or hosting provider is going to continue
>> to offer IPv4 lest they island themselves from su
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Jacques Latour
wrote:
>
> Is there a list of IPv6 only ISP or services? I'd be curious to trend
> that somehow, by geography, service type, etc... if any.
>
Since "IPv6 only" right now is primarily about those portions of the
network that are under a single orga
So frequently on this list we hear people asking/begging their providers
for IPv6 roadmaps or chastising them for the lack of same, that I thought
it might be nice to actually give props to a provider actually moving the
needle.
I was pleasantly surprised today to notice an IPv6 address on my
Yes, we have started the IPv6 enablement of our wireless network. West was
completed dual stack on Sept 29, Ontario will come next then east region.
Rogers Internet has completed all the IPv6 enablement. Fido Internet is
coming! Please email me directly for your IPv6 experience with Rogers.
We do have dual stack in all our customer sites, and at the time being
didn't got complains or support calls that may be considered due to the
.
So far everyone who has contacted me has generally reported a positive
experience with their transitions.
The biggest complaints so far have com
Hi,
I've set the reply-to address to me as this message has gone to
several lists.
There will be an IPv6 Deployment Panel discussion at the ICANN
meeting in San Juan, Puerto Rico on Sunday 24 June between 3pm and
4.30pm (UTC -4). The session will focus on the issues associated
I generally agree with the design of RA and using DHPCv6 as a
supplement to it. The problems here seem to be more along the lines
of implementation in clients. I suspect it will take some time for
the dust to settle and vendors to get their act together.
I notice that Cisco has a "prefix no-auto
> I notice that Cisco has a "prefix no-autoconfig" statement in some
Yes, advertise it as on-link but not suitable for autoconfig.
You would want to do this (along with the M & O bits) for a stateful-DHCPv6
segment ...
> >From what I've been told, Cisco is actively working on RA-gaurd for
> t
> And not just Cisco, IIRC it is an open standard anyone can implement ... ?
Here is the work being done on RA-Gaurd:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ra-guard-03
--
Ray Soucy
Communications Specialist
+1 (207) 561-3526
Communications and Network Services
University of Maine Syste
We have networks and businesses to run. Why are we rehashing this yet
again?
For example, in December 200l http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/2007-12/msg00280.html
shows messages regarding exactly this issue. for emphasis I
redundantly requote, "You have seen this before from me: Cons
> This to me is one of the least credible claims of the RA/SLAAC crowd.
> On the one hand we have carriers around the world with millions and
> millions of customers getting default routes and other config through
> DHCPv4 every day. And most of the time it actually works very well!
>
> On the othe
In a message written on Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 03:23:13PM -0400, Ray Soucy wrote:
> If the argument against RA being used to provide gateway information
> is "rogue RA," then announcing gateway information though the use of
> DHCPv6 doesn't solve anything. Sure you'll get around rogue RA, but
> you'
Sorry, not buying it.
The solution here, and one that is already being worked on by vendors,
is RA gaurd, not changing DHCPv6 in an effort to bypass RA.
What your proposing as a solution isn't much of a solution at all but
just a (seemingly) lesser problem.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Leo B
In a message written on Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 03:42:19PM -0400, Ray Soucy wrote:
> The solution here, and one that is already being worked on by vendors,
> is RA gaurd, not changing DHCPv6 in an effort to bypass RA.
Port based solutions don't work well on wireless networks and other
mediums.
--
Really. How do we deal with rouge DHCP on the wireless LAN, obviously
this is such a complex issue that we couldn't possibly have a solution
that could be applied to RA.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 03:42:19PM -0400, Ray Souc
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 03:57:40PM -0400, Ray Soucy wrote:
> Really. How do we deal with rouge DHCP on the wireless LAN, obviously
> this is such a complex issue that we couldn't possibly have a solution
> that could be applied to RA.
Rogue DHCP doesn't immedately take down the entire subnet of m
Correct.
Not sure if you got the sarcasm in that last reply...
As far as I'm concerned, a rogue is a rogue. Knowing about it the
instant it happens might even be better than slowly coming to the
realization that you're dealing with one. The point is that we need
to address rogues regardless of
On Oct 22, 2009, at 12:23 PM, Ray Soucy wrote:
This to me is one of the least credible claims of the RA/SLAAC crowd.
On the one hand we have carriers around the world with millions and
millions of customers getting default routes and other config through
DHCPv4 every day. And most of the time i
Original Message
From: Ray Soucy
>Or is it that you want IPv6 to be a 128-bit version of IPv4?
Yes, this is in fact exactly what the network operators keep saying.
>RA is a
>good idea and it works. You can add options to DHCPv6, but I don't
>see many vendors implementing default
Owen DeLong wrote:
Not at all. People are not saying RA has to go away. They are saying we
need the option of DHCPv6 doing the job where we do not feel that RA is
the correct tool.
Then let me say it. RA needs to be able to be completely turned off.
DHCPv6 needs to be able to completely
>
>
> Port based solutions don't work well on wireless networks and other
> mediums.
>
> Something like PSPF then? (assuming it works properly on IPv6 multicast ...
)
/TJ
>
>
>>> Then let me say it. RA needs to be able to be completely turned off.
> DHCPv6 needs to be able to completely configure all requesting hosts.
Those two statements are not synonymous ...
Sure, leave RA in the IPv6 stack. The market will decide, and we will see if
> it is still on by defau
On Oct 22, 2009, at 4:32 PM, Ray Soucy wrote:
Knowing about it the
instant it happens might even be better than slowly coming to the
realization that you're dealing with one.
Might just be me, but I'm more worried about the rogue RA (or DHCPv4)
server that does not disrupt communication at
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 03:57:40PM -0400, Ray Soucy wrote:
> Really. How do we deal with rouge DHCP on the wireless LAN, obviously
> this is such a complex issue that we couldn't possibly have a solution
> that could be applied to RA.
There are some wireless equipment that claim to have a setting
David W. Hankins wrote:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 03:57:40PM -0400, Ray Soucy wrote:
Really. How do we deal with rouge DHCP on the wireless LAN, obviously
this is such a complex issue that we couldn't possibly have a solution
that could be applied to RA.
There are some wireless equipmen
On Oct 22, 2009, at 2:31 PM, TJ wrote:
Then let me say it. RA needs to be able to be completely turned
off.
DHCPv6 needs to be able to completely configure all requesting hosts.
Those two statements are not synonymous ...
They may not be synonymous, but, there is a set of operators for
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:50:47PM +1300, Perry Lorier wrote:
> I've implemented myself a system which firewalled all ARP within the AP and
> queried the DHCP server asking for the correct MAC for that lease then sent
> the ARP back (as well as firewalling DHCP servers and the like). It's
> qui
On wireless networks you can note the mac address of the rouge server
and dissociate it from the wireless network, this is rather similar to
what we did on switches prior to dhcp protection, it is reactive but it
certainly can be automatic.
Some controller based wireless systems have ips or nac fu
On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 20:48 -0700, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> the mac address of the rouge server
It's R-O-G-U-E - rogue.
Rouge is French for red and English for red make-up.
Regards, K.
--
~~~
Karl Auer (ka...@biplane.com.au)
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 17:33:34 +1100
Karl Auer wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 20:48 -0700, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> > the mac address of the rouge server
>
>
>
> It's R-O-G-U-E - rogue.
>
> Rouge is French for red and English for red make-up.
>
>
>
Also the colour of the faces of angry net adm
Could have been a server in drag? ;)
Karl Auer wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 20:48 -0700, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>
>> the mac address of the rouge server
>>
>
>
>
> It's R-O-G-U-E - rogue.
>
> Rouge is French for red and English for red make-up.
>
>
>
> Regards, K.
>
>
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 11:33 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 20:48 -0700, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>> the mac address of the rouge server
>
>
>
> It's R-O-G-U-E - rogue.
>
> Rouge is French for red and English for red make-up.
Also the name of the Ford assembly plant at which the Monday
The Wi-Fi MAC protocol has a pair of header bits that mean "from AP"
and "to AP." In ad-hoc mode, a designated station acts as an AP, so
that's nothing special. There are a couple of non-AP modes for direct
link exchanges and peer-to-peer exchances that probably don't set "from
AP" b
Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> As already said, wireless in infrastructure mode (with access points)
>> always sends traffic between clients through the access point, so a
>> decent AP can filter this.
> How does the client determine that the traffic came from the AP versus
> another client?
I'm not exa
And of course, a rogue RA station would _NEVER_ mess with that bit
in what it transmits...
Uh, yeah.
Owen
On Nov 7, 2009, at 2:41 AM, Richard Bennett wrote:
The Wi-Fi MAC protocol has a pair of header bits that mean "from AP"
and "to AP." In ad-hoc mode, a designated station acts as an AP
It's not all that easy unless the dude has hacked the device driver.
Owen DeLong wrote:
And of course, a rogue RA station would _NEVER_ mess with that bit
in what it transmits...
Uh, yeah.
Owen
On Nov 7, 2009, at 2:41 AM, Richard Bennett wrote:
The Wi-Fi MAC protocol has a pair of header
: Bernhard Schmidt; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: {SPAM?} Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN
It's not all that easy unless the dude has hacked the device driver.
Owen DeLong wrote:
> And of course, a rogue RA station would _NEVER_ mess with that bit
> in what it transmits...
>
> Uh, yeah
NANOGers -
An important reminder: this Global IPv6 deployment survey is closing at the end
of March.
If you have a moment, please take the time to complete this survey so that the
RIRs may collectively have a better understanding of the status of IPv6
deployment in the Internet.
Thanks
> On Oct 1, 2016, at 8:37 PM, Hugo Slabbert wrote:
>
> So, kudos, Rogers Wireless!
This has also been live on Roger's Fido sub-brand for a while now, too.
2605:8d80:484:: is live in Vancouver.
--lyndon
On Sat, 1 Oct 2016, Hugo Slabbert wrote:
So, kudos, Rogers Wireless!
http://labs.apnic.net/cgi-bin/ccpagev6?c=CA
Sort on "samples".
Seems Telus and Rogers are the only top10 with any double digit % IPv6
users. Telus is at 65-70%, that's a really good number.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail
I'm also seeing IPv6 on Rogers 4g/LTE on an Android in Winnipeg!
Looks like I'm part of 2605:8d80:400::/38
Theodore Baschak - AS395089 - Hextet Systems
https://ciscodude.net/ - https://hextet.systems/
http://mbix.ca/
> On Oct 1, 2016, at 10:37 PM, Hugo Slabbert wrote:
>
> So frequently on this
- Original Message -
> From: "Ida Leung"
> [ ... ... ] Fido Internet
> is
> coming!
Cool!
My gateway is 1:3603/150. Who do I poll?
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com
Hello!
As the first IPv6 deployments for end-users are in the planning stage
in Germany, I realized I have not found any BCP for handling
addressing in those scenarios. IPv6 will make it a lot easier for
static address deployments but I wonder weather this is in the best
sense for the customers. A
So far everyone who has contacted me has generally reported a
positive experience with >their transitions.
Which ISP/NSP's?
-M<
MARTINEZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> CC: Nanog
> Asunto: IPv6 Deployment (Was: Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted)
>
>
>> We do have dual stack in all our customer sites, and at the time being
>> didn't got complains or support calls that may be considered due to the
>
But now PI is there, no more restrictions in the path, so they can use
"traditional" multihoming :-)
If ARIN is going to assign /48's, and people are blocking anything longer
than /32- well then that's a problem :)
-Don
Donald Stahl wrote:
If ARIN is going to assign /48's, and people are blocking anything
longer than /32- well then that's a problem :)
To be specific, ARIN is currently assigning up to /48 out of
2620::/23.
I noticed that http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html
has the following en
y 2007 10:12:54 -0400 (EDT)
> Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> CC: Nanog
> Asunto: Re: IPv6 Deployment (Was: Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted)
>
>
>> But now PI is there, no more restrictions in the path, so they can use
>> "traditional" multih
As part of our IPv6 training project, that consists of face to face
training and on-line learning modules and testimonials, we are proud
to announce the second in a series of interviews.
Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCcigLJJbvU
So far, we have
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
Did you reach any conclusion on this matter?
Let the user choose. Here in Sweden we've for 10 years had ISPs offering
static IPv4 address (either handed out via DHCP or just plain static with
no dynamics what so ever) and some users prefer tha
On 18 aug 2010, at 01:12, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> prefer static addressing. But in the world of facebook and co. I
> wonder if it would be a better to let the user have the choice. A
What does facebook have to do with it ? Ever heard of cookies ?
MarcoH
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Marco Hogewoning wrote:
>
> On 18 aug 2010, at 01:12, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>
>> prefer static addressing. But in the world of facebook and co. I
>> wonder if it would be a better to let the user have the choice. A
>
> What does facebook have to do with it ?
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> For people who want to use DNS and run services, they'll most likely want a
> static address/subnet that doesn't change in the first place (even though it
> should be handed out via DHCPv6-PD for ease). If someone wants to be
> anonymous
On 18 aug 2010, at 09:35, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Marco Hogewoning wrote:
>>
>> On 18 aug 2010, at 01:12, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>>
>>> prefer static addressing. But in the world of facebook and co. I
>>> wonder if it would be a better to let the use
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 01:12:19 +0200
Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> Hello!
>
> As the first IPv6 deployments for end-users are in the planning stage
> in Germany, I realized I have not found any BCP for handling
> addressing in those scenarios. IPv6 will make it a lot easier for
> static address de
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Mark Smith wrote:
> Haven't really thought about it before.
>
> One thing to consider is that unless the preferred and valid lifetimes
> of an IPv6 prefix are set to infinity, IPv6 prefixes are always dynamic
> - they'll eventually expire unless they're refreshed.
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 16:18:00 +0200
Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Mark Smith wrote:
> > Haven't really thought about it before.
> >
> > One thing to consider is that unless the preferred and valid lifetimes
> > of an IPv6 prefix are set to infinity, IPv6 prefixes
Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
the other one will be dynamically allocated. I have no clue how the
user would switch between these subnets (without using some kind of
command line tools).
Web portals work fine, and honestly, it's not like you need to switch
subnets, either. PPPoE/A implementation
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 20:04:47 +0930
Mark Smith
wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 01:12:19 +0200
> Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > As the first IPv6 deployments for end-users are in the planning stage
> > in Germany, I realized I have not found any BCP for handling
> > addressing in
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Mark Smith wrote:
> They help because you're concerned about privacy. You didn't qualify
> that you're only concerned about privacy from geolocation services, so
> I described a mechanism that would provide you as much privacy as
> possible, while also being automa
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
> Web portals work fine, and honestly, it's not like you need to switch
> subnets, either. PPPoE/A implementations work great, as they are already
> designed to utilize radius backends to quickly alter static/dynamic on a
> session. For bridging s
201 - 300 of 356 matches
Mail list logo
