nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 Confusion
From: David Conrad <drc () virtualized org>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 12:20:19 -0800
On Feb 17, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Tony Hain wrote:
Approach IPv6 as a new and different protocol.
Unfortunately, I gather this isn't what end users or network operators want or expect. I suspect if we want to make real inroads towards IPv6 deployment, we'll need to spend a bit more time making IPv6 look, taste, and feel like IPv4 and less time berating folks for "IPv4- think" (not that you do this, but others here do). For example, getting over the stateless autoconfig religion (which was never fully thought out -- how does a autoconfig'd device get a DNS name associated with their address in a DNSSEC-signed world again?) and letting network operators use DHCP with IPv6 the way they do with IPv4.
Or, we simply continue down the path of more NATv4. Regards, -drc
Current thread:
- RE: IPv6 Confusion, (continued)
- RE: IPv6 Confusion Carl Rosevear (Feb 17)
- RE: IPv6 Confusion Tony Hain (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Owen DeLong (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Mark Smith (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Nathan Ward (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Kevin Oberman (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Randy Bush (Feb 17)
- RE: IPv6 Confusion Frank Bulk (Feb 19)
- RE: IPv6 Confusion Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 19)
- RE: IPv6 Confusion Carl Rosevear (Feb 17)
- RE: IPv6 Confusion Tony Hain (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion David Conrad (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Paul Ferguson (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Mark Smith (Feb 17)
- RE: IPv6 Confusion TJ (Feb 17)
- RE: IPv6 Confusion Tony Hain (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion David Conrad (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Kevin Loch (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Nick Hilliard (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion John Schnizlein (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Aria Stewart (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Chuck Anderson (Feb 18)