Re: IPv6 fc00::/7 - Unique local addresses

[Ben Jencks <ben () bjencks net>]

On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 00:58, David Conrad <drc () virtualized org> wrote:
> On Nov 1, 2010, at 6:42 PM, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
> > > My guess is that the millions of residential users will be less and
> > > less enthused with (pure) PA each time they change service providers...
> > That claim seems to be unsupported by current experience.   Please elaborate.
>
> Currently, most residential customers have PA+NATv4, where the CPE provides the public IPv4 address to the NATv4 box 
> (which might be the same box as the CPE) via DHCP (or PPPoE). As such, all internal devices are shielded from all 
> renumbering events.  In a NATless PA world, all devices will need to be renumbered on a change of provider.  While in 
> theory, address lifetimes and multiple addresses should reduce the impact renumbering might have, I will admit some 
> skepticism that renumbering IPv6 providers will be sufficiently transparent as customers are used to with IPv4 
> PA+NATv4. Perhaps I am wrong.

No "average residential user" should ever see or configure an IPv6
address; all the vendors are using zeroconf etc. to avoid it at all
costs. If it was all autoconfigured in the first place, there's no
reason autoconfiguration shouldn't be able to renumber it.

-Ben