nanog mailing list archives
Re: ISP customer assignments
From: TJ <trejrco () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 09:45:45 -0400
Actually, I would argue IPv6 is a bit of both classfull and classless. (Moreso the latter ...) The protocol itself, /64 "mandate" aside, certainly allows you to place arbitrary-bit-long prefix lengths - and to aggregate/summarize at any point. And /64s do not so much apply in some cases, whether 'permitted' by spec (/128) or not(/126). Thus classless. OTOH, we have policies that define how we will allocate this address space that do look eerily similar to the Classfull methods we started off with in IPv4. I too am always ... hmm, surprised isn't the right word ... when this angers|scares|confuses people. Anyway, I enjoy the conversation and hope this helps ... /TJ On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Dan White <dwhite () olp net> wrote:
On 05/10/09 22:28 -0400, Ricky Beam wrote:On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:13:37 -0400, Dan White <dwhite () olp net> wrote:I don't understand. You're saying you have overlapping class boundaries in your network?No. What I'm saying is IPv6 is supposed to be the new, ground-breaking, unimaginably huge *classless* network. Yet, 2 hours into day one, a classful boundary has already been woven into it's DNA. Saying it'sI would disagree. IPv6 is designed around class boundaries which, in my understanding, are: A layer two network gets assigned a /64 A customer gets assigned a /48 An ISP gets assigned a /32 (unless they need more) classless because routing logic doesn't care is pure bull. In order forthe most basic, fundamental, part (the magic -- holy grail -- address autoconfig) to function, the network has to be a minimum of /64. Even when the reason for that limit -- using one's MAC to form a (supposedly) unique address without having to consult with anything or fire off a single packet -- has long bit the dust; privacy extensions generate addresses at random and have to take steps to avoid address collisions, so continuing to cling to "it has to be 64bits" is infuriating.IPv6 provides you the opportunity to design your network around your layer two needs, not limited by restrictive layer 3 subnetting needs. If your complaint is that all devices in a /64 are going to see IPv6 broadcast/multicast packets from the rest of the devices in that subnet, then don't assign 2^64 devices to that subnet. I still don't understand why its infuriating to you, but I can certainly tell that it is. -- Dan White BTC Broadband
-- /TJ
Current thread:
- Re: ISP customer assignments, (continued)
- Re: ISP customer assignments William Herrin (Oct 05)
- Re: ISP customer assignments Ricky Beam (Oct 05)
- Re: ISP customer assignments Dan White (Oct 05)
- Re: ISP customer assignments Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 05)
- Re: ISP customer assignments Dan White (Oct 05)
- Re: ISP customer assignments Ricky Beam (Oct 05)
- Re: ISP customer assignments Dan White (Oct 06)
- RE: ISP customer assignments TJ (Oct 05)
- Re: ISP customer assignments Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 05)
- Message not available
- Re: ISP customer assignments Dan White (Oct 06)
- Re: ISP customer assignments TJ (Oct 06)
- Re: ISP customer assignments James Hess (Oct 06)
- Re: ISP customer assignments Michael Dillon (Oct 08)
- Re: ISP customer assignments Steven Bellovin (Oct 05)
- Re: ISP customer assignments Owen DeLong (Oct 05)
- Re: ISP customer assignments Michael Thomas (Oct 05)
- Re: ISP customer assignments David Andersen (Oct 05)
- Re: ISP customer assignments Michael Thomas (Oct 05)
- Re: ISP customer assignments David Barak (Oct 05)