nanog mailing list archives
Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested
From: Joe Abley <jabley () isc org>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:29:02 -0500
On 11 Nov 2004, at 15:01, Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 11:16:04AM -0800, Tony Hain wrote:The existence of the address space does not require nat. Being stuck in the mindset where there is only one address on an interface leads people to believe that nat is an automatic result local addresses. Assigning a local prefix for local purposes (like a printer or lightswitch) at the same time as a global prefix for those things that need to reach the Internet does notrequire nat.It's not clear to me that having multiple addresses on every machine makes anything simpler or easier. In particular, if I'm multi-homed to two networks, the "IPv6 way" seems to have each box have an IP address on each network.
Rather than engage in another invigorating argument as to why the original vision of v6 multihoming is flawed in practice, it may suffice to say that these issues have been debated extensively in multi6, and commenting on the (several) proposed solutions to the general multi-homing problem on the multi6 list may be more productive than re-hashing the reason for multi6's existence on the nanog list.
Joe
Current thread:
- Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?, (continued)
- Re: IPV6 renumbering painless? Alexei Roudnev (Nov 13)
- Re: IPV6 renumbering painless? Christopher L. Morrow (Nov 12)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Randy Bush (Nov 11)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Iljitsch van Beijnum (Nov 11)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Adi Linden (Nov 15)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Iljitsch van Beijnum (Nov 15)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Måns Nilsson (Nov 11)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Randy Bush (Nov 11)
- RE: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Tony Hain (Nov 11)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Leo Bicknell (Nov 11)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Joe Abley (Nov 11)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 11)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Eric Gauthier (Nov 08)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Randy Bush (Nov 08)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Daniel Roesen (Nov 08)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Randy Bush (Nov 08)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Daniel Roesen (Nov 08)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Sascha Lenz (Nov 08)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Steven M. Bellovin (Nov 08)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Ted Hardie (Nov 08)
- Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested Randy Bush (Nov 08)