Re: New (-02) version of IPv6 CPE Router draft is available for review

[Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>]

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008, Alain Durand wrote:

> I think this is one too many. Especially is there is a variable that the
> customer has to configure to select which mode the router is on. I look at
> this as a potential source of calls to the tech support.

I'm ok with "globall routable WAN IPv6 address" being the default. My only 
request is that the "link-local only WAN" and "assign loopback address for 
management from DHCPv6 PD block"-model is a SHOULD requirement in the 
draft.

> Choosing between the 2 modes, I would favor the numbered one. The reason is
> that we still have customers who attach a single PC to their cable modem.
> Those device would be just as happy with a single DHCPv6 assigned address.

The service I have in mind would require the customer to have a router, 
otherwise they'll have to purchase a different service.

Basically what I envision is that for single PC deployment we'd run 
tunneling (6to4) or equivalent, and "customer has a proper CPE router" 
would be native IPv6. Single PC is ok to have tunneled as there will be no 
multicast etc in that service. For routed multicast IPv6 you really really 
want to have a CPE router (at least that is my opinion).

I am also looking at this in the 5-10 year future, where I think all 
customers want to have a routed CPE in their home and have multiple 
subnets. Not including "link-local WAN" in the model is too short-sighted 
for me, even though I can understand why people are hesitant about it in 
the short term.

--
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se