[ipv6hackers] Pros and Cons of Address Randomization

[opykuskus at gmail.com]

R
Sent from my BlackBerry wireless device from MTN

-----Original Message-----
From: TJ <trejrco at gmail.com>
Sender: ipv6hackers-bounces at lists.si6networks.com
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:22:00 
To: IPv6 Hackers Mailing List<ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com>
Reply-To: IPv6 Hackers Mailing List <ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com>
Subject: Re: [ipv6hackers] Pros and Cons of Address Randomization

>
> > But I see it as the only possibility to migrate millions of SOHO
> networks.
>
> Why? Lots of SOHO networks are already on IPv6 without NATv6 and I don't
> see what possible advantage you are advocating here.
>
> Owen
>


Indeed, my home has native IPv6 ... no tunnels, no custom firmware, no
sweaty handshakes with my ISP.  My ISP happens to have lit up native in my
service region, I happen to have a D3 capable CM and a reatively modern CPE
(off the shelf) that does DHCPv6+PD on the uplink.

And it all "just works" - my wife, daughter and any visitors I let onto my
network are IPv6 enabled and don't know it (except that I told them, and
they still don't really care ... which, again, is actually part of the
point).

So ... what problem are we trying to solve by adding NATv6 into htis
picture / conversation?


/TJ
_______________________________________________
Ipv6hackers mailing list
Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com
http://lists.si6networks.com/listinfo/ipv6hackers