Re: Liaison from BBF

[Phil Bedard <[e-mail]>]

Answers inline

On Nov 9, 2009, at 12:09 PM, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:[e-mail]]
>
> Here is the crux of my not understanding the problem:
>
>> And no, I haven't seen any residential rollout
>> plan where
>> IPv6 would be provisioned in the static way you describe,
>> DHCPv6-PD seems
>> to be the most popular method seen in discussion.
>
> Does not the ISP control, own, and distribute the "residential  
> gateway"? If yes, then the DHCP conducted within the broadcast  
> domain part of the network, i.e. the "last mile" part *outside*  
> customer premises, should be able to ensure uniqueness of the EUI  
> and consequently the IPv6 address of each residential gateway WAN  
> side, no? So that DHCP or whatever method of assigning IPv6 WAN side  
> addresses should be safe.
>

Traditionally, they don't.  Some providers can provide a gateway but  
it's far cheaper to go to your local electronics store and get a home  
router with wireless than to "rent" one from a service provider.   
You'll find a SP-provided gateway more often with business services  
than residential services.


> For that matter, one could use the client identifier option, and the  
> ISP could hard-code the client ID in each of their residential  
> gateways, before distributing these to customer premises.
>
> Why would ISP not own and control the residential gateway?
>

The just don't.


> We received our ADSL "modem" in the mail, from Verizon. It is a NAT,  
> and the WAN side is under their control entirely. Is this not  
> standard practice among ISPs?
>

Not for most ISPs in the US.  I would say the Verizon example is more  
the exception than the rule.  I've only ever used my own store-bought  
gateway.  For most cable providers in the US you don't even need to  
use their provided modem, you can bring your own and use it.


Phil