----- Forwarded message from Bjørn Mork <bj...@mork.no> ----- From: Bjørn Mork <bj...@mork.no> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 13:55:27 +0100 To: na...@nanog.org Subject: Re: Low end, cool CPE. Organization: m User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux)
Leo Bicknell <bickn...@ufp.org> writes: > - IPv6 support, native or tunnel to tunnelbroker.net type thing. This is far too diffuse. You'll get a "yes, we've got IPv6". You should at least add - IPv6 packet filtering and policy management (at least simple access lists) - DHCPv6-PD client running over PPP or ethernet (possibly bridged DSL) WAN interface(s) - Ability to split the delegated prefix into a /64 for every LAN and loopback interface, preferably fully configurable - Configurable RA on LAN interfaces, using the dynamically allocated prefixes - (wishlist) configurable ifid's on the LAN and loopback interfaces as an alternative to using EUI-64 - WAN link addressing using whatever is available of SLAAC, DHCPv6 IA_NA or link local. Specifically: Using SLAAC for the WAN link should be possible without sacrificing any router functionality on the CPE. and probably a lot more. DNS resolver handling needs a chapter on it's own.... The point is: We've been asking for "IPv6" for too long. That's just one bit in a packet header. We need to start asking for the features we expect, which is a lot more than that bit. Bjørn ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: discussion-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: discussion-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
