nanog mailing list archives
Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 01:40:06 -0500
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 10:45 PM, Mark Andrews <Mark_Andrews () isc org> wrote:
We already know some will need more than a /48. /48 was only ever described as meeting the requirements of *most* business and consumers.
so.. what businesses need is not actually 'more than one /48' but real, useful, doable multihoming. A /48 is fine if you have only one site, it's been used to solve 2 of 3 problems: 1) my addresses don't have to change (if I only have one site) 2) I can multihome with a single address on my devices/hosts (cause the original v6 plan for that was just dumb) It doesn't solve the problem of an enterprise with more than one location/network-interconnect... we can go around this rose bush again and again and again, but honestly, deployment of v6 happens for real when there is a significant business reason to deploy it, and when the real concerns of enterprises today are actually addressed. -Chris
Current thread:
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Roger Marquis (Feb 04)
- RE: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space TJ (Feb 04)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Mark Andrews (Feb 04)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Martin Hannigan (Feb 04)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Christopher Morrow (Feb 04)
- RE: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space TJ (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Marshall Eubanks (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Christopher Morrow (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Joe Abley (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Jack Bates (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Iljitsch van Beijnum (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Owen DeLong (Feb 05)