-----Original Message----- From: Michael Thomas <[email protected]> Date: Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:57 PM To: Lorenzo Colitti <[email protected]> Cc: Dave Taht <[email protected]>, Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Mark Townsley <[email protected]>, Jari Arkko <[email protected]>, John Jason Brzozowski <[email protected]>, "[email protected] Group" <[email protected]>, David Lamparter <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando
>Lorenzo Colitti wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Michael Thomas <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Sigh. >> >> >> Sigh all you like, but I share Dave's skepticism that ISP's >> renumbering my prefix willy-nilly and it just sort of works with >> naming -- including addresses squirrelled away in places they ought >> not be -- is going to work any time soon. >> >> >> That's why we have ULAs and multiple prefixes. > >ULA's are of limited use. I still want to start my washing machine >regardless of >whether I'm at home or not. [jjmb] maybe today, who knows about tomorrow. > > >> I don't like to think that NAT is inevitable but frankly the people >> in this working group don't get to vote on that. >> >> >> Actually they do. They have the freedom to specify alternatives, and >> depending on how good a job they do, implementers may choose to use >>them. > >Wishful thinking. NAT's didn't start with the blessing of IETF as I >recall. They just >happened. If the alternatives are too whacked out, history will repeat >itself. [jjmb] not sure I agree here, the conditions and parameters are different today specifically there are currently no issues with IPv6 resource availability. > > >> Speaking to the title of this thread: has anybody actually >> demonstrated such a thing end to end? It strikes me as >> Frankensteinian when you get all of the body parts bolted together. >> >> >> What thing exactly? Multiprefix multihoming? End-to-end connectivity in >> general? > >Yes, along with naming, security, prefix delegation across multiple >routers, and isp's >giving and withdrawing prefixes due to renumbering. I'm dubious that this >has happened >in real life with networks with people whose day job is to worry about >such things, and >I'd be astonished to hear such a thing has been shown to work on a home >network. [jjmb] hmmm we have quite a few real customers that are using IPv6 enabled on a daily basis mostly using technology that we specified ~8 years ago. Does this count? > >Mike _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
