AW: [ipv6-wg] dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers

However I think this is an educational problem of those agencies Š you
can't offer dynamic and stable services to access the home, and privacy
goes beyond a stable address. So miss-protecting privacy actually is
against user services.

Regarding the routing table, my guess is that you should aggregate all the
customer prefixes, in a small number of prefixes for each BRAS, PoP, etc.,
so no difference here with IPv4.

Regards,
Jordi


-----Mensaje original-----
De: <Olaf.Bonness at telekom.de>
Responder a: <Olaf.Bonness at telekom.de>
Fecha: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 15:49:27 +0200
Para: <ip at ioshints.info>, Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.palet at consulintel.es>
Asunto: AW: [ipv6-wg] dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential
customers

>Regarding Jordis question I've to add that regulatory agencies in some
>countries are not voting for static/permanent prefix delegation to
>customers, because of privacy reasons.
>
>Kind regards
>Olaf
>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: ipv6-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:ipv6-wg-admin at ripe.net]
>> Im Auftrag von Ivan Pepelnjak
>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. Juli 2011 09:45
>> An: jordi.palet at consulintel.es; ipv6-wg at ripe.net
>> Betreff: RE: [ipv6-wg] dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to
>> residential customers
>>
>> Unfortunately you have to do static prefix delegation because
>> it's impossible to renumber the customer's inside LAN within
>> a reasonable time interval with today's state of IPv6 SLAAC.
>>
>> However, static delegations might cause IPv6 routing table
>> explosion unless you're very careful (with dynamic IPv4
>> address allocation you could define address pool on BRAS and
>> advertise just the pool prefix into the rest of the network).
>>
>> Ivan
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: ipv6-wg-admin at ripe.net
>> [mailto:ipv6-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of
>> > JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
>> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 3:02 PM
>> > To: ipv6-wg at ripe.net
>> > Subject: [ipv6-wg] dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential
>> > customers
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I will like to know, from those deploying IPv6 services to
>> residential
>> > customers, if you are planning to provide static or dynamic
>> IPv6 prefixes.
>> >
>> > Just to be clear, I'm for static prefix delegation to residential
>> > customers, however I heard that some ISPs are doing dynamic
>> delegations,
>> > the same way as is common today with IPv4.
>> >
>> > I don't thin it make sense, as the main reason for doing so
>> in IPv4 was
>> > address exhaustion and legacy oversubscription models such
>> as PPP/dial-up.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Jordi
>> >
>> > PS: I've sent this question to NANOG, got very few answers,
>> so trying here
>> > ...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > **********************************************
>> > IPv4 is over
>> > Are you ready for the new Internet ?
>> > http://www.consulintel.es
>> > The IPv6 Company
>> >
>> > This electronic message contains information which may be
>> privileged or
>> > confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
>> > individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended
>> recipient be aware
>> > that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the
>> contents of this
>> > information, including attached files, is prohibited.
>> >
>>
>>
>>



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.