On 2011-07-26 16:58 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
Hi all,
I will like to know, from those deploying IPv6 services to residential customers, if you are planning to provide static or dynamic IPv6 prefixes.
Just to be clear, I'm for static prefix delegation to residential customers, however I heard that some ISPs are doing dynamic delegations, the same way as is common today with IPv4.
I don't thin it make sense, as the main reason for doing so in IPv4 was address exhaustion and legacy oversubscription models such as PPP/dial-up.
You are forgetting the simple fact that you can charge for static addresses and unblocked connectivity. THAT is the reason for dynamic addresses, as on the ISP level there are still enough IPv4 addresses and they can still, even today, ask for more from their RIR. Abuse/accounting/etc all become much simpler with static addresses. But as long as you give those users dynamic addresses, they might not run a SMTP/HTTP/xxx server on their link as changing IPs is kind-of-annoying (but doable with the proper DNS setup and low TTLs) Thus, you give them dynamic stuff, or only 1 IP address and ask them for lots of moneys when they want a static address or hey lots more moneys (in the form of a 'business connection') when they want multiple addresses routed to their host. And don't bother asking for proper reverse setup in a lot of cases either, let alone delegation of that. Greets, Jeroen Happily using the same static IPv6 /48 for almost a decade ;)