On Tue, 22 Apr 2003, David Morris wrote: > On 22 Apr 2003, Paul Vixie wrote: > > > > The rhetoric would have us believe that frequent renumbering with IPv6 > > > is seamless and effortless. I don't personally buy that, but there are > > > some assumptions there that perhaps should be challenged more directly > > > rather than in this oblique fashion. > > > > yesterday we had to change an AAAA RR and PTR RR because one of our > > servers got a new GigE interface to replace the old FastE. no part > > of ipv6 renumbers seamlessly, from where i sit. > > IPV6 renumbering was guaranteed to always be problematic when the address > was defined to include the MAC address of the adapter. A mystery to me > from the day I first heard the design but since there is nothing I could > do to expect to change the design, I've not bothered to to try and > understand the rationale. Who said IPv6 addresses based on MAC addresses should be used on servers? We certainly don't. Manually configuring is the thing. FWIW, that process could be simpler too, though. But that's mostly implementation issues. An example is using RA's for setting default route but not configuring the address, and manually configuring only the EUI64 part but using the advertised /64. If it comes to making renumbering easier, I might document these as ways to make it easier. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings