Re: Ephemeral addressing [was Re: 64share v2]

[Philip Homburg <[e-mail]>]

> If you all you have are clients then the IPv4 Internet we have
> today works perfectly fine.

That's not correct for quite a few reasons:
- RIR are by and large out of IPv4 addresses. It is hard to connect a client
  to an IPv4 internet when you have no addresses.
- If an ISP has some IPv4 addresses then bandwidth on a CGN box is more
  expensive than an IPv6 router
- Servers need addresses, so we now require parties to buy second hand
  addresses on the open market. 
- It is perfectly possible to offer service on changing addresses. There is
  this thing called DNS that can be used to assign a stable name to changing
  addresses.

In any case, good support for ephemeral address doesn't hurt operators who
deply static addresses. My servers at home get static addresses from
DHCPv4. Phones, etc. get dynamic addresses. 

Your own proposal of turning L2 bridges into L3 routers creates a lot more 
ephemeral addresses. Currently, relative large subnets have a single /64,
so each device that connects there will have a stable SLAAC address.

When each link has its own /64 then on wifi each time a device connects it
will get a different address (unless 802.1X is used with radius to assign a
static prefix to an account).

So it not clear to me why you are complaining about shortlived addresses.