mailing list archives
RE: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers
From: Leo Vegoda <leo.vegoda () icann org>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 08:37:50 -0700
One point I often miss in the endless discussions wrt dynamic/static
IPv6 with references to the dynamic IPv4 world, is the lack of RFC1918
addressing for IPv6. The fact is that all residential users are used
to, and depend on, static IPv4 addressing within their own network.
They assign e.g. 192.168.5.5 to their printer and 192.168.5.6 to their
NAS, and trust that those addresses are static.
They can do this with a ULA prefix if they want (RFC 4193). It is both private and most likely (really, very, very
likely) unique. This assumes they only want their printer or NAS to be accessible on their own local network.
RE: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers Leo Vegoda (Aug 02)