[arin-ppml] IPv6 Transition Policy (aka Soft Landing)
owen at delong.com
Sun Oct 10 19:55:29 EDT 2010
On Oct 10, 2010, at 11:49 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
> Owen DeLong wrote:
>> On Oct 10, 2010, at 9:53 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
>> APIPA doesn't work for meaningful regular internet communications. You can't deploy an
>> enterprise numbered with APIPA. Suggesting it as an alternative for SLAAC is like
>> suggesting RIP as an alternative for BGP in the network core.
> Apipa is an example of auto configuration with dad. In 16 bits. Shining, it is not. Functional, it is. It is part of zeroconf which comes with multicast DNS as well as other things. Apple makes extensive use of this. It is obviously not intended for a routed managed environment, useful only on an ad-hoc basis.
s/functional/dysfunctional/ and I would agree with you.
SLAAC is useful in a routed managed environment. APIPA is _NOT_ anywhere near suitable
as a replacement.
> apipa is judged to only be useful when no routing is available, by way of static configuration or dhcp on that interface. In that same vein, slaac is a useless bit of technology when presented with the ubiquitous coupling of dhcp servers inside of routers.
Ah, among other things, APIPA assumes the lack of static or DHCP configuration indicates a lcak
of routing availability which is an invalid and incorrect assumption and causes significant problems
in the real world.
> In my view 64 bit subnet sizing hard coded in standards and protocols is a mistake. It should be fixed if possible, or it can be made irrelevant by subsequent technology, such as DHCP.
As others have said... The IETF lists are that away. ---->
Changing RFCs is completely outside of ARIN scope.
More information about the ARIN-PPML