Why every discussion on IPv6 always starts with the address space. What about mobility, security, routing optimization, better QoS support, etc.
And please don't say a hammered solution like NAT is the way to go - I guess everyone from the VoIP/streaming/P2P worlds is familiar with the headaches of trasversing NAT devices.
About using your MAC address to built a local automatic IPv6 is plain simple, MAC addresses (namely ethernet ones) are unique! IPv6 does not replace/obsoletes DHCP, that's why there's DHCPv6 - but DHCP is a service, autoconfiguration in IPv6 is meant to be automatic and not dependent in configured/maintened services. IPv6 was brought up by the same people who brought up and manage the Internet up to now - IETF! They made a good job the first time, do you think they lost it?
Slashdot Mirror
What about mobility, security, routing optimization, better QoS support, etc.
And please don't say a hammered solution like NAT is the way to go - I guess everyone from the VoIP/streaming/P2P worlds is familiar with the headaches of trasversing NAT devices.
About using your MAC address to built a local automatic IPv6 is plain simple, MAC addresses (namely ethernet ones) are unique!
IPv6 does not replace/obsoletes DHCP, that's why there's DHCPv6 - but DHCP is a service, autoconfiguration in IPv6 is meant to be automatic and not dependent in configured/maintened services.
IPv6 was brought up by the same people who brought up and manage the Internet up to now - IETF! They made a good job the first time, do you think they lost it?