Re: static vs dynamic

[bill <bmanning@karoshi.com>]

> ----- Original Message From: "bill" <bmanning@karoshi.com>
> > > > 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
> >
> > 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.
> >
> 
> 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.
> 

	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