This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/ipv6-wg@ripe.net/
[ipv6-wg] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP document - draft v.2 for review.
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP document - draft v.2 for review.
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP document - draft v.2 for review.
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jens Link
lists at quux.de
Sat May 13 10:16:07 CEST 2017
Jan Zorz - Go6 <jan at go6.si> writes: Hi, > Draft version 2 is now available for reading at > https://sinog.si/docs/draft-IPv6pd-BCOP-v2.pdf I like but I don't see it happening. 1. Stable Addresses - Data protection people will have a hart attack when they read this. As will many customers. Don't get me wrong I *do* want a stable prefix at home but many people don't. Changing addresses gives them some pseudo anonymity and the warm feeling that they are not traceable and secure. And stable addresses are a way to make money. sys4 has a office in Munich and VDSL from M-Net. We pay extra for one stable IPv4 address but they wont hand out a stable IPv6 prefix. If you want stable v6 you have to buy their SDSL products which are way more expensive. We don't want to run any service in the office. We just want stable addresses for equipment and some training / lab VMs in the office. 2. Prefix length. I totally agree: Handout a /48 or /56. But this doesn't happen right now. And I don't think provider who have v6 now wont change their ways of doing things. I'm a customer of Kabel Deutschland an I can get either DS-Lite with a /64 or a public IPv4 Address (I chose the later an tunnel my own IPv6). For some CPEs (provided by KDG) they handout a /62. A friend recently told be about another provider handing out /57. Unfortunately the competitors are not much better. Then there are the smalltown providers providing FTTH[1] who think that becoming an ISP is easy. They don't become an LIR, they get a /2x from their upstream and I guess they wont get much more then a /48 *if* they do implement IPv6 (but right now NAT seems to work to well and people are happy that they have faster internet then before). Jens [1] Which is not alwas FTTH. But people know the name from the news. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Foelderichstr. 40 | 13595 Berlin, Germany | +49-151-18721264 | | http://blog.quux.de | jabber: jenslink at quux.de | --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP document - draft v.2 for review.
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP document - draft v.2 for review.
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]