Static vs SLAAC - Static expected to be preferred?

[S.P.Zeidler]

Thus wrote Eric Vyncke (evyncke) (evyncke at cisco.com):

> OTOH, if you move to another network, then your static prefix can be wrong and SLAAC should be preferred :-)
> 
> SLAAC also provides for the GW address.
> 
> BWT I agree that for servers & other 'static hosts', static configuration is easier (DNS & ACL), replicable (changing NIC/HW), and more secure

I would expect that with ample public addresses available it'll become more
normal to bind a service to a dedicated static address explicitly.

regards,
	spz
-- 
spz at serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)