IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Residential ISPs & IPv6 NAT

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Tue, 25 March 2014 08:04 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8C2D1A0138 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 01:04:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.668
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.668 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9xwYfOqek-q8 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 01:04:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15A591A007A for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 01:04:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost.ecs.soton.ac.uk [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s2P84RYa011712; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:04:27 GMT
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk s2P84RYa011712
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1395734668; bh=gg8Yd6yGrTGYkucO6qtqYuFFzvk=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=nXrs4D+PqM9gQ3fSkZQqqkPr9pSmO7fFyvBz4bXQw8h++JTivlMOjtSkbd9buOtLm 75xC5f6NWyeBH3QXsO+X1as1VDre+egU4RHKgFlJ/qFxUbrfD/XbS9jKfP+WmSjtQg Kv6eD9ubyNb+eXRXdaYhSxi5Ab/L4428vxGTjxA4=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk ([2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:401]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:68da]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id q2O84R0546024072Db ret-id none; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:04:28 +0000
Received: from tjc-vpn.ecs.soton.ac.uk (tjc-vpn.ecs.soton.ac.uk [152.78.236.241]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s2P84NHV007069 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:04:24 GMT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
Subject: Re: Residential ISPs & IPv6 NAT
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <53305599.7050007@umn.edu>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:04:23 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <EMEW3|2800c9078eadc5bddc4d369ef04735b0q2O84R03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|A127D019-98C0-4D2D-9C66-1F8063A7611D@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <E7F457F9-0D46-471A-8A4B-E502B44CE090@gmail.com> <1B268ED1-CC05-4E4C-9957-2AFCC7AE488A@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <EMEW3|045c6bc0fd02fe8ee2785ec87c927c5fq2IEvD03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|1B268ED1-CC05-4E4C-9957-2AFCC7AE488A@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <53305599.7050007@umn.edu> <A127D019-98C0-4D2D-9C66-1F8063A7611D@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=q2O84R054602407200; tid=q2O84R0546024072Db; client=relay,forged,no_ptr,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=2:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: s2P84RYa011712
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/Bydq8N05W5EpkbYmiaeasWo_q1U
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:04:52 -0000

On 24 Mar 2014, at 15:56, David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu> wrote:

> However, what if an ISP is unwilling to delegate shorter than a /64 prefix?  Yes, we can say until we are blue in the face that ISPs OUGHT TO (from [RFC6919]) provide longer than a /64 to customers, especially when asked.  But, we can't make them, there are no IETF police.

So who are the residential ISPs offering only a /64?

Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email