<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
<br>
<div>
<div>On 31/01/2011, at 12:47 PM, Damien Morris wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On 31/01/11 12:26 PM, "Matthew Moyle-Croft" <<a href="mailto:mmc@internode.com.au">mmc@internode.com.au</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">They're mostly from people who don't appear to have done it.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">We've got IPv6 dual stack for customers. We sell ADSL CPE<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">which supports IPv6 (and more of our current ones will in the<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">next months).<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
What happens if you run dry of v4 for the dual stack? Is there a future<br>
planned where customers will be v6-only, and how they'll reach v4 content<br>
in that case?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We start to insert the evil layer called CGNAT. This'll no doubt cover classes of customers who don't want to pay extra for their own IPv4 address. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(This is not indication of our particular strategy, just what'll likely happen generally. Don't assume that having an unshared IP now won't mean you'll keep it in the future no matter how you misread someone's T&C).</div>
</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">The customers change their ADSL login from<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:username@internode.on.net">username@internode.on.net</a> <<a href="mailto:username@internode.on.net">mailto:username@internode.on.net</a>> to<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:username@ipv6.internode.on.net">username@ipv6.internode.on.net</a> <<a href="mailto:username@ipv6.internode.on.net">mailto:username@ipv6.internode.on.net</a>><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">on capable CPE and it just works. I'm tempted to get my 88 year old<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">grandfather (who bought himself a Win7 laptop recently) a dual stack CPE<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">just so I can say that it's that easy.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Most people have dual stack OSes these days so don't even have to do<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">anything. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I like that.. I'll try it once I have capable CPE. Have any particular<br>
vendors/models proven themselves in the field to reliably dual-stack or</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>pure v6?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Billion 7800N and NL do dual stack. Fritz!Box we're about to sell does it. Netcomm have beta code for one model. Billion are working on code for other devices.</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
Do the CPEs dole out world-routable v6 IPs to wired/wireless clients like<br>
they currently do with RFC1918 space? Dual-stack public v6/private v4?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
World routable v6.</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">e.g: /48s vs /56s vs /64s for consumers, /64s vs /126s for PtP, SLAAC vs<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">DHCPv6, ND vs DoS attacks, DNS64/NAT64 vs "it'll never work"..<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation is important. The subnet size is, well, not<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">very relevant, /64 is too small, but anything more is fine for almost<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">anyone.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">DHCPv6 hopefully will be supported by more OSes and that'll make life<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">pretty<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">easy.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
/64 is too small because the customer may want to subnet further and we<br>
want to avoid NAT..?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Yes. Not so much NAT, but v6 really needs /64 on a "LAN" segment. /60 is what we're using on our trial and NOT one person has run into a problem with that. </div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Perhaps when it comes to IP it's possible to have too much of a good<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">thing? Or have most people worked it out and it's just the vocal minority<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">on nanog? :)<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Too much noise, not enough doing as usual on NANOG.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
:) I suspected, I just thought it would be a lot more settled by this<br>
point. Is Internode's strategy fairly indicative of what we'll see from<br>
the rest of the industry?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
Dunno. We have a strategy, ask the rest of the industry if they do.</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
Thanks for the reply MMC, I know a lot of this must be getting old to<br>
discuss.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A bit. Explaining DHCPv6 PD is getting annoying. I think I might write some slides and just get on the conference circuit to tell people how this s**t works.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>MMC</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
Cheers,<br>
Damien.<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
AusNOG mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; ">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12px; ">
<div>-- <br>
Matthew Moyle-Croft</div>
<div>Peering Manager and Team Lead - Commercial and DSLAMs</div>
<div>Internode /Agile</div>
<div>Level 5, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia<br>
Email: <a href="mailto:mmc@internode.com.au">mmc@internode.com.au</a> Web: <a href="http://www.on.net/">http://www.on.net</a><br>
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span>
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "></span> Mobile: +61-419-900-366<br>
Reception: +61-8-8228-2999 Fax: +61-8-8235-6909</div>
</span></div>
</div>
</span></span></div>
<br>
</body>
</html>