[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ping-pong phenomenon with p2p links & /127 prefixes
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 17:24:00 +0200 (CEST)
> > And all you'll end up with is IPv4 with bigger addresses. You really
> > should catch up with the useful features of protocols that were
> > designed in the late 80s / early 90s, like IPX, Appletalk, DECNet and
> > CLNS.
> For me "more addresses" is the *only* justification for IPv6. All the
> other "useful" features are either uninteresting or even *unwanted*.
Just so I know, are you confirming that you've only ever used IPv4, and
know nothing about any other protocols and how they worked?
Your view seems to me to be a bit like saying, "I'm perfectly happy
with my 1970s car, it gets me from A to B, and I see no reason to have
electric windows, anti-lock brakes, electronic fuel injection, or a GPS,
because my 1970s car doesn't have them".
> I'm sort of okay with RA on customer links (though I would much rather
> have a more featureful DHCPv6). For my backbone links RA is simply out
> of the picture, not even interesting to discuss.
> The "failover" capabilities of IPv6 with RA I would much rather solve
> with HSRP/VRRP.
> Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, email@example.com