[aklug] Re: IPv6 benefits me...

Actually, what's being discussed within the CableLabs area
is -multiple- IPv6 networks for the home.

It requires the support of new CPE devices, of course, but the
only way to get around the zero-NAT on IPv6 is to provide
enough address space to deal with multiple levels of networks
within the home. =20

There are a lot of caveats and a lot of work to do with this
proposal, so I won't spend any time trying to summarize.

Most likely, though, folks will get at least 4-bits worth
of netspace to play with at home, when all is said and done.

=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: aklug-bounce@aklug.org [mailto:aklug-bounce@aklug.org]=20
> On Behalf Of Arthur Corliss
> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 2:49 PM
> To: Erinn Looney-Triggs
> Cc: aklug@aklug.org
> Subject: [aklug] Re: IPv6 benefits me...
>=20
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2012, Erinn Looney-Triggs wrote:
>=20
> > No it wouldn't and it is not the default behaviour for the=20
> server OS,
> > you are correct and I made a mistake.
>=20
> You were right about the random ID thing on the server, that=20
> is enabled by
> default. It's just the privacy stuff that they disable by default on=20
> the server. I didn't know about that, and it's definitely=20
> good to know.
> Personally, I'm still trying to figure out the benefit,=20
> outside of hiding
> who your NIC's vendor is.
>=20
> > And I can say with 100% certainty that I wasn't instructing=20
> Chris on how
> > to set up a windows server :). My response to Chris was you get more
> > addresses.
>=20
> :-) Not to nitpick, but I don't think that's what's going to=20
> happen. I
> think the ISPs will give you statics, but as member addresses=20
> of your local
> subnet. If ISPs wanted to give out /64s they'd have to=20
> either allocate=20
> a static and update their routing tables for it, or they'd=20
> have to trust
> customer router advertisements. Something I don't think=20
> they'd want to do.
> It's simpler, more secure, and less config management on=20
> their end to just
> give you a range of IPs for the local subnet. Anything more=20
> will probably
> require a CPE router that they can manage.
>=20
> Of course, the proof will be in the pudding. When & if ISPs=20
> start offering
> it, we'll find out what they'll offer and how they'll manage it.
>=20
> > I was however, responding to your statement which I felt was overly
> > broad and not entirely true. They way I did that was to=20
> point out what
> > Microsoft is doing. However, even here it looks like I am wrong, it
> > appears that MS configures a non EUI-64 address for the=20
> client, and then
> > additional randomized addresses for privacy, which is where=20
> I got all
> > confused.
> >
> > So all in all, damn I hate being wrong.
>=20
> Welcome to my world. :-) I've been told repeatedly that I'm=20
> only capable of
> learning the hard way, which makes me wrong 75% of the time.
>=20
> --Arthur Corliss
> Live Free or Die
> ---------
> To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
> with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
>=20
> =
---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
Received on Wed Jun 6 15:01:21 2012