nanog mailing list archives
RE: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers
From: Leo Vegoda <leo.vegoda () icann org>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 08:37:50 -0700
You wrote:
One point I often miss in the endless discussions wrt dynamic/static IPv6 with references to the dynamic IPv4 world, is the lack of RFC1918 addressing for IPv6. The fact is that all residential users are used to, and depend on, static IPv4 addressing within their own network. They assign e.g. 192.168.5.5 to their printer and 192.168.5.6 to their NAS, and trust that those addresses are static.
They can do this with a ULA prefix if they want (RFC 4193). It is both private and most likely (really, very, very likely) unique. This assumes they only want their printer or NAS to be accessible on their own local network. Regards, Leo
Current thread:
- Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers, (continued)
- Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers Scott Helms (Aug 02)
- Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers Jima (Aug 02)
- Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers Blake Dunlap (Aug 02)
- Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers Owen DeLong (Aug 02)
- Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers Mark Andrews (Aug 02)
- Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers Owen DeLong (Aug 03)
- Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers Mark Andrews (Aug 02)
- Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers Mark Newton (Aug 02)
- Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers Joel Jaeggli (Aug 02)
- Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers Valdis . Kletnieks (Aug 03)
- Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers Scott Helms (Aug 02)