ipv6-ops Digest, Vol 159, Issue 1

[Michael Sturtz]

Mr. Doering, I could not agree with you more!  
This sort of operational nonsense will limit the wider acceptance of IPv6!  I am responsible research and for the documentation and implementation of IPv6 for a Fortune 200 company.  We have locations worldwide.  The allocation of unstable end network addresses complicates the deployment and support of IPv6.  Essentially, this means we would need to ask ISPs for a stable IPv6 block and frequently we run into problems with the ISP not even understanding what we need even though their network backbone and endpoints are running IPv6!  It took us a long time to be able to obtain a /48 that actually works at our main datacenter where we already have commercial fiber.  Finally, due to our major contract with the provider we were able to escalate to support engineering that understood the requirements and got it working.   Having ISPs randomly change the /64 that is allocated to end user networks creates confusion and operational problems for exactly the people who least understand what is going on and why there are connectivity problems.  End users have become used to having a stable internal IPv4 address space for decades now we want them to switch to an unstable IPv6 internal network address space?   I don't believe that ULA multi-homing is a solution either.
    




-----Original Message-----
From: Gert Doering <gert at space.net> 
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2019 11:50 PM
To: Fernando Gont <fernando at gont.com.ar>
Cc: Michael Sturtz <Michael.Sturtz at PACCAR.com>; ipv6-ops at lists.cluenet.de
Subject: Re: ipv6-ops Digest, Vol 159, Issue 1

Hi,

On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 09:02:44AM -0300, Fernando Gont wrote:
> As noted in the draft, the renumbered home network is one of many 
> possible scenarios where the renumbering event occurs. While we can 
> certainly recommend stable prefixes, I do think that the network 
> should be robust in the presence of such events.

Right.  This is missing in the whole "only bad ISPs will ever give their customers prefixes that are not stable" discussing - customers *change* ISPs, and this should be as painless as it is in the IPv4+NAT world.

Thus, anything relying or implicitly assuming "IPv6 addresses are stable"
(in an unmanaged SoHo network) must be very much discouraged.

Maybe even dual-/48 multihoming can be made to work one day (and no, it is not even working well in theory today, but even less so in practice with the CPE implementations you can buy today).

Gert Doering
        -- Operator
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279