On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote: > > [...] > The next version of cerowrt will do translation from the external IPv6 > address range to a static internal one (or ones, in the case of > multiple egress gateways), and lacking a standard for such will use > fcxx/8 addressing. I will make it be an option for people to turn off, > but I've had it with being renumbered. >
And so it begins. > I am sure this will break stuff, and I don't know what all it will do, > and I intend to find out. > I'd prefer that we simply consider CeroWRT with this change to be fundamentally broken, and begin by keeping track of the things that still work with it, rather than what it breaks. > Until some far off day where we have stable name to ipv6 address > mapping, and vice versa, it is otherwise impossible to have useful > ipv6 based services inside the home or small business. > Doesn't seem impossible to me. Too difficult? I could agree with that, but I would have to say it's the ubiquitous RFC 6092 filters that are going to kill that idea before the frequent renumbering does. Seriously, people: we could give up on the IPv6 servers on home and small business networks thing any day now, and I don't think we would lose much steam. Given that those filters are everywhere and turned on by default in most cases, it's only just a little bit worse if home gateways are using NPTv6 too. It's not like you could use working address referral if you wanted. (p.s. I'm aware of at least one other serious proposal to use NPTv6 in a shipping home gateway. It would be easier to argue against it if those RFC 6092 filters weren't installed everywhere.) -- james woodyatt <[email protected]> Nest Labs, Communications Engineering
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
