[ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal

[Michael K. Smith - Adhost]

> > A very large number of residential users run multiple computers, both
> > laptops on wireless or small hubs.  Their ISP can, of course, easily
> > assign them a subnet of IPv6.  But, they will need a router at their
> > site to route the IPv6 subnet.
> 
> Perhaps if your cable modem, often provided by the ISP, dropped off a
> /64 there would be a lot of users who had no need for a NAT/Router.
> WiFi boxes may not be manageable over IPv6, but can broadcast an
> IPv6 network at layer 2 in this configuration.  The primary reason
> people have "routers" today is they get a single IP, so they need a NAT
> gatway to connect multiple computers.  Providing a /64 makes that
> unnecessary, which largely means support in those boxes is a non-issue.
> 
> Imagine that, removing a box from the network, reducing cost,
> complexity, and configuration.
> 
Imagine all those PC's with no broadcast-level demarcation connected over a cable system.  Imagine all those open ports.  

Mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 475 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20080214/db9b0fa4/attachment.sig>