Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

[Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

> On Sep 28, 2021, at 08:13 , Masataka Ohta <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp> wrote:
>
> Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> > > Heh, NAT is not that evil after all. Do you expect that all the home
> > > people will get routable public IPs for all they toys inside house?
> > Yes! Remember routable does not mean that it is reachable from outside.
>
> Do you mean, because of hole punching, "not routable" does not mean
> that it is "not reachable from outside"?
>
> > > And if they change ISP they will get new range?
> > Yes!
>
> The problem is that IPv6 was promised to perform *AUTOMATIC*
> *RENUMBERING*, with which, even if address ranges change, all
> the configuration information, including those for DNS glues,
> can be automatically updated.

Sure it can… That’s just software.

> With careful design by real experts, it is possible to design
> such a protocol even with IPv4 but IPv6 "committee" naturally
> abandoned to do so with IPv6.

What’s missing? We already have DDNS and DHCP is already capable of 
doing what’s needed to update the DNS server there.

If you don’t like DDNS, then there are relatively simple ways to script DNS updates for prefix changes as well.

Owen