Nat

[dougb at dougbarton.us (Doug Barton)]

On 12/18/2015 01:20 PM, Lee Howard wrote:
>
>
> On 12/17/15, 1:59 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Matthew Petach"

>> I'm still waiting for the IETF to come around
>> to allowing feature parity between IPv4 and IPv6
>> when it comes to DHCP.  The stance of not
>> allowing the DHCP server to assign a default
>> gateway to the host in IPv6 is a big stumbling
>> point for at least one large enterprise I'm aware
>> of.
>
>
> Tell me again why you want this, and not routing information from the
> router?

C'mon Lee, stop pretending that you're interested in the answer to this 
question, and wasting everyone's time in the process. You know the 
answers, just as well as the people who would give them.

>> Right now, the biggest obstacle to IPv6
>> deployment seems to be the ivory-tower types
>> in the IETF that want to keep it pristine, vs
>> allowing it to work in the real world.
>
> There?s a mix of people at IETF, but more operator input there would be
> helpful. I have a particular draft in mind that is stuck between ?we?d
> rather delay IPv6 than do it wrong? and ?be realistic about how people
> will deploy it."

On this topic the operator input has been clear for over a decade, and 
yet the purists have blocked progress this whole time. The biggest 
roadblock to IPv6 deployment are its most ardent "supporters."