North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: v6 subnet size for DSL & leased line customers

  • From: Deepak Jain
  • Date: Mon Dec 24 14:13:13 2007

Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Dec 22, 2007 12:23 PM, Ross Vandegrift <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 01:33:15PM -0500, Deepak Jain wrote:
For example... Within one's own network (or subnet if you will) we can
absorb all the concepts of V4 today and have lots of space available.
For example... for the DMZ of a business... Why not give them 6 bits
(/122?) are we anticipating topology differences UPSTREAM from the
customers that can take advantage of subnet differences between /64 and
/56 ?
I am confused on this point as well.  IPv6 documents seem to assume
that because auto-discovery on a LAN uses a /64, you always have to
use a /64 global-scope subnet.  I don't see any technical issues that
require this though.  ICMPv6 is capable of passing info on prefixes of
any length -  prefix length is a plain old 8bit field.

Uhm, so sure the spec might be able to do something different than /64 but most equipment I've used only does auto-conf if the prefix is a /64 :( Somewhere along the path to ipng we got reverted to classful addressing again :(

I think this is the point I was trying to make. Just because we have "so many bits" now... why does the equipment/software need to get "stupider" again? Are we going to have an IPv6 CIDR initiative again (15 years from now) to recover all of that wasted space from "early" allocations)..

Merry Christmas, and junk.