On Jul 3, 2005, at 10:16 AM, Peter Dambier wrote:
The good thing with IPv6 is autoconfiguration. There is no need to renumber.
I wasn't aware IPv6 auto-configuration: - updated AAAAs and PTRs for all possible entries DNS associated with the old address, including the glue records maintained by other folks. - updated filters, firewalls, and security credentials bound to the old address. - updated router configurations, network management, and monitoring systems. - updated node locked software licenses (should they exist). - updated configuration files that include IP addresses. - provided a mechanism to transfer long running TCP sessions to the new address. etc. Of course, if you talk to many large enterprise IT folks about IPv6 stateless auto-configuration, they look at you in horror and ask "why in the world would I want to let simply anyone attach to my network and get a valid address?!?". Auto-configuration (stateless or statefull) helps in renumbering. It doesn't remove the requirement however. And since there will be the requirement, someone will address it in the obvious (if arguably stupid) way: NATv6.
I have given up writing a new peace of software every now and then to fix a new protocol broken on my NAT-router.
I'm well aware of the many problems NAT creates, particularly when folks come up with protocols that (perhaps even purposefully) don't recognize the simple fact that NAT exists. However, pretending that IPv6 is a panacea is silly. IPv6 dealt with the address space limitations found in IPv4 (although there are those who believe the way IPv6 is being allocated results in the IPv6 truck trying to drive into the IPv4 swamp yelling "me too! me too!" (paraphrasing and with apologies to Dave Clark)). IPv6 didn't deal with routing scalability or insuring packets are coming from and/or going to where they should. However, I'm sure something will be hacked together if IPv6 takes off. Necessity is a mother and all that... Rgds, -drc