mailing list archives
Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers
From: Jay Ashworth <jra () baylink com>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:56:05 -0400 (EDT)
----- Original Message -----
From: "james machado" <hvgeekwtrvl () gmail com>
Complain about NAT all you want but NAT + RFC 1918 addressing in IPv4
made things such as these much nicer in a home and business setting.
An argument I've been making right along. Concern about what's happening
network-wise outside my edge router belongs to my edge router, *and no
other device on my LAN* should be held hostage by problems there.
That's my best practice advice (to my clients, at least), and if IPv6
makes that impossible, well, then, things are gonna get messy, until someone
figures out a way around it, cause I'm sure I'm not the only person who
views it that way...
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra () baylink com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274