Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

[Mark Andrews <marka () isc org>]

In message <op.x1hpayv0tfhldh () rbeam xactional com>, "Ricky Beam" writes:
> On Wed, 08 Jul 2015 22:49:17 -0400, Karl Auer <kauer () biplane com au> wrote:
> > You, we, all of us have to stop using the present to limit the future.
> > What IS should not be used to define what SHOULD BE.
> >
> > What people NOW HAVE in their homes should not be used to dictate to
> > them what they CAN HAVE in their homes, which is what you do when you
> > provide them only with non-globally-routable address space (IPv4 NAT),
> > or too few subnets (IPv6 /56) to name just two examples.
>
> Talking about IPv6, we aren't carving a limit in granite. 99.99999% of  
> home networks currently have no need for multiple networks, and thus,  
> don't ask for anything more; they get a single /64 prefix. If tomorrow  
> they need more, set the hint to 60 and they get a /60. Need more, ask for  
> 56... CURRENTLY, providers have their DHCP server(s) set to a limit of 56.  
> But that's simply a number in a config file; it can be changed as easily  
> as it was set the first time. (source pool size and other infrastructure  
> aside.) It's just like the escalation of speeds: as the need for it rises,  
> it becomes available. (in general, at least)

I already have 3 /64's hanging off a WNDR3700 (one for each of the
wireless networks and one for the wired).  If I turn on the second
ssid's for each radio that would be 5.

As for a customer getting a ISP's to increase the /56 PD to a /52
or a /48 I just don't see that happening.  It will either require
custom configuration for the customer or going back to the RIR and
asking for a bigger allocation based on moving from /56 to /52 or
/48 for all customers.  You then have to manage the transition.

Mark
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka () isc org