RE: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

["Naslund, Steve" <SNaslund () medline com>]

> Subject: Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion
>
> Because vendor pressure depends on a userbase that knows enough to demand fixes.

No vendor pressure is dependent on people buying their stuff.  Don't send that CPE to your user if it does not meet 
your standards.  If their stuff breaks because of shortsighted coding to bad for them.  I am not going to be the guy to 
build in stupid limitations today to save a few minutes of coding for some lazy hardware vendor.

> Simple fact is that if most ISPs deploy degraded services, vendors will code to the lowest common denominator of that 
> degraded service and we’ll all be forced to live within those limitations in the products we receive.

Why would you think so?  Did your IPv4 router not accept a /8 netmask even though there was very little chance you 
would get one?  I know most of my programmers are trained to anticipate all of the possible options for an input.  
Sometimes this is hard to define but with IPv6 it is clearly in the specification.

Would you consider an ISP that hands out /56s to be "degraded"?  Most users wouldn't know the difference and if you 
offered the /48 on request (or even better automatically on depletion of the /56) what would be degraded?

> This is already evident in the IPv4 world. Even though my TiVO is 100% reachable from the internet, I can’t use any of 
> TiVO’s applications to access it directly, I have to work through their proxy servers that depend on periodic >polling 
> from my devices to work because they assume everyone is stuck behind NAT.

That would be Tivo's fault wouldn't it.  It would be trivially simple for them to know if they were behind a NAT so I 
am guessing they force you through their proxy for other purposes.  Should we re-engineer the way IP works so that Tivo 
can write crap code?  Should we limit all future v6 users today so that crap CPE works now?

> Can you offer one valid reason not to give residential users /48s? Any benefit whatsoever?

I never said that there was a valid reason not to use /48s or /56s or whatever prefix you like.  What I am saying is 
don't force that decision on anyone today.  IPv6 does not force the use of any particular prefix length for an end 
user, why should you?  Why do we all have to use the same length anyways?

> Owen


Steven Naslund
Chicago IL