Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers

[Sascha Lenz <slz () baycix de>]

Hi,


> Hi all,
>
> I will like to know, from those deploying IPv6 services to residential
> customers, if you are planning to provide static or dynamic IPv6 prefixes.
>
> Just to be clear, I'm for static prefix delegation to residential
> customers, however I heard that some ISPs are doing dynamic delegations,
> the same way as is common today with IPv4.
>
> I don't thin it make sense, as the main reason for doing so in IPv4 was
> address exhaustion and legacy oversubscription models such as PPP/dial-up.

well, it does make sense for most of the residential customers nowadays, because
they are indoctrinated with this idea of dynamic+NAT == privacy for over a decade
now and don't know any better.

So, i don't think it's a good idea to hand out static prefixes to residential customers
by default, it might cause pain.

The best current practice would be, to default to a dynamic prefix, but enable your
more advanced customers to change that to a static prefix at will in your customer
service web-portal or something.

But i have no idea how to sell this to your marketing department.
They again are usually used to sell static IPs for an extra fee, and usually don't 
want to change that with IPv6. That's bullshit for IPv6 of course.

(Another idea, which i scrapped after thinking about it in depth was, to hand out
a dynamic P2P prefix (/64) + a /56 (or /48) static on top, so the customer/CPE could chose
what to use, but that is actually too complicated in the end and would need support
in the CPE firmware)

-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind Regards

Sascha Lenz [SLZ-RIPE]
Senior System- & Network Architect