Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: IPv6 end user addressing
From: Jeff Wheeler <jsw () inconcepts biz>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:17:54 -0400

On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
That said, /48 to the home should be what is happening, and /56 is
a better compromise than anything smaller.

Is hierarchical routing within the SOHO network the reason you believe
/48 is useful?  You don't really imagine that end-users will require
more than 2^8 subnets, but that they will want several levels of very
simple, nibble-aligned routers within their network?

This is perhaps a good discussion to have.  I, for one, see CPE
vendors still shipping products without IPv6 support at all, let alone
any mechanism for creating an address or routing hierarchy within the
home without the end-user configuring it himself.  I am not aware of
any automatic means to do this, or even any working group trying to
produce that feature.

Is it true that there is no existing work on this?  If that is the
case, why would we not try to steer any such future work in such a way
that it can manage to do what the end-user wants without requiring a
/48 in their home?

Jeff S Wheeler <jsw () inconcepts biz>
Sr Network Operator  /  Innovative Network Concepts

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]