6 ms·

Does this mean I’ll finally, finally be able to get a static IP (albeit an IPv6 one) for my apartment? Or are they going to ultimately pull some obscene pervers

Does this mean I’ll finally, finally be able to get a static IP (albeit an IPv6 one) for my apartment? Or are they going to ultimately pull some obscene perversion out of their hat whereby you have to pay stratospheric business-class rates to actually get an IPv6 address, and their justification is because it comes bundled with an infuriating potpourri of cut-rate “business-class” nonsense that no one wants (web hosting, email, etc.)? The fact that I can’t just pay $10/month (or whatever) for a static IP on my residential broadband connection is so exasperating.

dhugiaskmak 15y ago
It's Comcast, how do you think it's going to work?
wmf 15y ago
Static vs. dynamic is orthogonal to IPv6. I would expect that "residential" service will continue to use dynamic addresses for the foreseeable future.
- icebraining 15y ago
  Wasn't one of the reasons for the deployment of dynamic IPs to residential users (as opposed to LAN environments) the reduced number of IPs required, since you'd have a pool all clients could share? IPv6 doesn't have that problem, and it seems to me that keeping them fixed is probably cheaper in terms of billing and accountability.
  - gilgad13 15y ago
    Perhaps that was the original goal, but now-a-days its pretty rare for a customer to turn off his or her modem, so its unlikely a customer would ever give up an ip address that could be used by someone else. If pooling was the true original reason for dynamic IPs, it usefulness for that purpose has already passed, regardless of IPv6.
  - wmf 15y ago
    They'll do whatever is cheaper and then they'll tell you it's dynamic (or "not guaranteed to be static") as an incentive for some customers to upgrade to business service. I could definitely see scenarios where you end up connecting to a different CMTS and thus it's cheaper for them to assign a new prefix rather than carry your old prefix in their IGP. Or something like that.
- akira2501 15y ago
  It depends.. if they're issuing /64's, they're actually issuing networks, not host addresses anymore. I'd rather not have my entire network be renumbered every 6 hours when my DHCP updates.

dhugiaskmak 15y ago

It's Comcast, how do you think it's going to work?

wmf 15y ago

Static vs. dynamic is orthogonal to IPv6. I would expect that "residential" service will continue to use dynamic addresses for the foreseeable future.

icebraining 15y ago
Wasn't one of the reasons for the deployment of dynamic IPs to residential users (as opposed to LAN environments) the reduced number of IPs required, since you'd have a pool all clients could share? IPv6 doesn't have that problem, and it seems to me that keeping them fixed is probably cheaper in terms of billing and accountability.
- gilgad13 15y ago
  Perhaps that was the original goal, but now-a-days its pretty rare for a customer to turn off his or her modem, so its unlikely a customer would ever give up an ip address that could be used by someone else. If pooling was the true original reason for dynamic IPs, it usefulness for that purpose has already passed, regardless of IPv6.
- wmf 15y ago
  They'll do whatever is cheaper and then they'll tell you it's dynamic (or "not guaranteed to be static") as an incentive for some customers to upgrade to business service. I could definitely see scenarios where you end up connecting to a different CMTS and thus it's cheaper for them to assign a new prefix rather than carry your old prefix in their IGP. Or something like that.
akira2501 15y ago
It depends.. if they're issuing /64's, they're actually issuing networks, not host addresses anymore. I'd rather not have my entire network be renumbered every 6 hours when my DHCP updates.