[ipv6-wg] [atlas] What to do with RIPE Atlas probes that have only a ULA as IPv6 address?
Roman Mamedov rm at romanrm.net
Thu Mar 26 17:53:01 CET 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:26:14 +0100 Philip Homburg <philip.homburg at ripe.net> wrote: > > Nothing really surprising about this. There is simply no IPv6 > > offered by the ISP, and many ISPs still do not begin to deploy IPv6 > > and only promise (if even that) for months and years. > > But is that a good reason for a CPE to start announcing IPv6 prefixes? Sure, why not. Nobody is surprised when a CPE with no Internet uplinks configured or operating still provides DHCPv4 server to the LAN, giving out RFC-1918 IPs. > > And imagine some future IPv6-only client device. With ULA it could > > access local services of the user's LAN (for example files shared > > from a NAS), if there is no need for it to access anything on the > > Internet. Trying to use LLs for this and lugging around > > "%interface" everywhere is not an acceptable answer. > > Link local was supposed to solve the 'dentist office' problem where > there is no router. They really don't. Barely any (if any at all) client software supports explicitly specifying the interface identifier along with the IP or hostname, or does so in a consistent manner. LL IPs are not usable in any form by the user, aside from pinging from the command line (and even then, it's bothersome to not forget to specify the interface all the time). Even if there's some mDNS in operation, the proverbial dentist still can't be expected to be typing "http://printer.local%eth0/" into their web browser (assuming that would have been supported in the first place...) - -- With respect, Roman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlUUOW0ACgkQTLKSvz+PZwjsGgCcCLYysHqeJwNK+LrcTiFXwtFf BmQAn2d3QetdCRGw8mRh7Aq0FW8gww6Q =G6jE -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]