On 2011-Jun-06 16:03, Guillaume Leclanche wrote: > 2011/6/6 Jeroen Massar <jer...@unfix.org>: >> On 2011-Jun-06 15:44, Guillaume Leclanche wrote: >>> 2011/6/6 Jeroen Massar <jer...@unfix.org>: >>>> The fun and joy of 6rd is of course that your IPv6 prefix changes every >>>> time you get a new IPv4 address. With IPv4 and NAT this did not matter >>>> so much to the internal network, but now when your IP address changes >>>> you need to renumber your home network, the joys of that will be awesome >>>> for people selling consultancy services and the likes. >>>> (Just take a guess when NAT66 becomes standard because of that) >>> >>> Jeroen, I tought you were a lover of Unique Local Addresses, what >>> happened to you ? :) >> >> And why would I be that? > > Well let's say that was a reference to the work done by sixxs with the > ULA repository.
Providing a means for letting people solve a problem they think there might be does not imply any kind of love or even recommendation. And to make that clearer: folks should get a statically allocated prefix out of the PA block from their provider, or if they care enough to setup proper routing etc get a PI prefix from a RIR. > But in the end my point was that ULA, not NAT66 is the answer to this > situation (decoupling public from "private"). I did not understand why > you mentionned NAT66 then. ULA would still require NAT66 if you want those hosts to be able to communicate to the outside, unless of course you want to firewall your internal machines based on the global prefix and update those firewall rules and all other dependencies all the time when your prefix changes... (the prefix change is why I mention NAT66 as renumbering is not funny, anywhere). Greets, Jeroen _______________________________________________ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
