On Mar 24, 2014, at 9:36 AM, Alexander Lopez <alex.lopez@opsys.com> wrote:
not to mention the cost in readdressing your entire network when you change an upstream provider.
Nat was a fix to a problem of lack of addresses, however, the use of private address space 10/8, 192.168/16 has allowed many to enjoy a simple network addressing scheme.
This is easily and better solved in IPv6 using provider independent addressing which is readily available. <rant> Yes but the number of people needing just a /64 will far outnumber the one requesting a /48.
I would say that the majority of users today and for the future will not require a /48, but will simply use the allocation given to them by their upstream. Many today do not multi-home and how many SMB customers just use a single Public IP behind a NAT device? It is easy for us on this list to use or request PIA, but what about the 10 person office? It is late and I am just rambling, but even with DHCP(4and6) changing IP networks is not a trivial thing. Not hard, but it will require a lot more planning than what many do today of simply changing the WAN IP address and some records in the DNS (if needed) <OldGuyComplainingAboutHowGoodThingsWereBackInTheDay> I am not saying anything that is new to members of this group, I guess I am just venting a bit of frustration. </OldGuyComplainingAboutHowGoodThingsWereBackInTheDay> </rant>
Ipv6 requires a complete reeducation of they way we look at routing and the core of the network.
I wouldn't say complete, but significant.
Owen