[6bone] Request: two 6bone pTLAs

[Jørgen Hovland]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Iljitsch van Beijnum" <iljitsch at muada.com>
To: "Lars-Johan Liman" <liman at autonomica.se>
Cc: <6bone at mailman.isi.edu>
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 10:01 PM
Subject: Re: [6bone] Request: two 6bone pTLAs


> On 9-mei-04, at 21:16, Lars-Johan Liman wrote:
>
> I would be perfectly fine with stipulating that these addresses
> shouldn't be hardcoded by vendors, but rather specifically configured
> by end-users or their system administrators. Since these addresses will
> disappear in 2 years, hardcoding them would be counterproductive
> anyway.
>
> >    I really dislike a system where I or my ISP can be forced into
> >    starting an anycast instance just to balance the traffic and make
> >    sure that the service to the "local" clients is up to standard.
>
> I don't see how you would be forced to start an anycast service. And if
> you were so forced, this means there is no uptake of a "real" DNS
> resolver discovery mechanism, so the alternative would be that users
> either have no resolvers, or have to find them manually. Both seem
> infinitely worse than any inconvenience caused by the well-known
> addresses.

If you hardcode 1 nameserver address you need to setup anycast if you want
to use a secondary backup nameserver - unless you hardcode 2 nameserver ip
addresses of course. Then what about 3 or 8?
What about WINS ? What about bootp servers ? What about dhcp + mac-filtering
and static ips (not static mac)?
Why should I expect less features with IPv6 than with IPv4?  I am sure you
can hardcode anything.  Do you really believe in that we should hardcode
addresses just because your router advertisement daemon doesn't scale?

>
> >    Things shouldn't be turned "on" by default on the Internet, they
> >    should be turned "off". Otherwise you stand the risk of ending up
> >    like Windows, where every bell and whistle is turned on by default
> >    - open for each and every cracker to take advantage
> >    of. Automagically having them turned "on" also puts you in an
> >    awkward position from a legal standpoint:
>
> >    E.g., in court:
>
> >    Party1: "You keep bombarding me with traffic!"
> >    Party2: "I haven't turned on anything such, so it can't be my
> > fault!"
>
> I'm sorry, I don't find this argument convincing.

To the contrary, I find this very convincing.  DNS is an important service
on the internet - but it is certainly not  mandatory for every single
networked system on earth.

>
> > DHCP is the way to go. It's there, it works, it's been proven to fit
> > into really small appliances.
>
> Do you REALLY want to get into this on this list?

I must say that I agree with Mr Liman on this. DHCP works today and I don't
see why the concept shouldn't work tomorrow.

>
> Even if for the sake of argument it would be a good idea to run DHCP
> everywhere (which it isn't), then we still have the problem that some
> significant operating systems currently don't support it don't allow
> the user to add such support easily.

You can say the same thing about router advertisement.