Hi, On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 09:41:55AM -0500, Ted Lemon wrote: > On Oct 14, 2014, at 9:27 AM, Gert Doering <[email protected]> wrote: > > "flash renumber is a problem" is pretty much a non-argument, as flash > > renumbering *will* happen, and devices in the home *will* have to handle it. > > Indeed. The question is, should we increase the number of instances in > which they are forced to handle it, or no?
Yes.
Because this is the only way that application developers will learn to
handle it.
(When I first learned that T-Online was forcing this on their customers,
I was quite upset. After thinking about it for a few weeks, I came to the
conclusion that it's the inevitable and correct approach. If you make
the homenet renumber only "every few months", like "when the router is
offline for longer than <x> hours", people and application developers
will start assuming that IPv6 addresses are something static - and then,
when that renumbering happens, you'll get uproar and support calls.
Force a prefix change on homenets once a week, and developers will learn
how to cope with it, without breaking every time, requiring application /
appliance restarts, etc)
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
pgpAzXqYs9EBv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
