Subject: RE: static vs dynamic addresses for apps [RE: v6 deployment in general [Re: tunnel broker deployment [RE: Tunneling scenarios and mechanisms evaluation]]]

From: "Christian Huitema" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:12:34 -0800

> I think you're missing the context here.  Would you build an
> application which would only work if the user's IPv6 address is
> static, and not for the others?
> 
> At least when I have coded apps, I have to design them to work with
> everyone :).

Yup. In particular, applications must work on laptops. When a laptop
roams to a new WiFi hot spot, it gets a new address. Applications are
expected to go on working...

-- Christian Huitema

---

From: bill <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 03:16:14 -0800 (PST)

> expected to go on working...

	three areas where static wins big:

	) BGP peering 
	) DNS servers
	) Network Management

Sorry folks, there are things that (until there is a compelling reason to dump them)
will pretty much require static IP addresses.  Good Luck.

--bill

---

From: "EricLKlein" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:44:28 +0200

----- Original Message From: "bill" <[email-masked]>
> will pretty much require static IP addresses.  Good Luck.

I tend to agree that there will be cases where some IP addresses will need
to stay static. For example many devices have a static loop back address
used to identify it to the network management which would have a hard time
understanding what devices are during the autodiscovery process if the same
device changes addresses but not location or connections.

Where you have devices that change connections (like laptops or PCs on DHCP)
then you need to support changing addresses, but for peering (AS to AS or
BGP) and DNS servers or network (or element) managers these need to have a
static address or the services will not continue to work.

---

From: bill <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 04:04:29 -0800 (PST)

> static address or the services will not continue to work.

	too right.  just thought I'd chime in here w/ stuff that was
	discussed eight years ago in the IPv6 transition wg mtgs...
	some folks active now were not active in the discussion then.
	
--bill

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 16:02:13 +0200 (EET)

> will pretty much require static IP addresses.  Good Luck.

None of these seems applicable to the unmanaged networks scenario,
which was the context.  (Well, except if you want to delegate
reverse/forward DNS tree to a server in unmanaged network itself, but
I don't think this is so "unmanaged" any more :).

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

---

From: bill <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 09:13:09 -0800 (PST)

> I don't think this is so "unmanaged" any more :).

	then the context was lost.  and even "unmanaged" networks should
	have some nod to having instrumentation and auditing capabilities...
	IMHO of course.

--bill