Re: [sig-policy] Need to understand logic behind assigning /64IPv6 addre
- To: Usman Latif <osmankh at yahoo dot com>
- Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Need to understand logic behind assigning /64IPv6 addresses
- From: Owen DeLong <owen at delong dot com>
- Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 09:41:13 -0700
- Cc: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>, APNIC Address Policy SIG <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
- Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
- In-reply-to: <1316254867.91596.YahooMailNeo at web110208.mail.gq1 dot yahoo dot com>
- List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
- List-help: <mailto:email@example.com?subject=help>
- List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
- List-post: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <CA996512.4723Femail@example.com> <CA996666.4724Efirstname.lastname@example.org> <1316170978.99371.YahooMailNeo@web110210.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <1316172558.33904.YahooMailNeo@web110213.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <1316232393.27438.YahooMailNeo@web110209.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <email@example.com> <1316254867.91596.YahooMailNeo@web110208.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
On Sep 17, 2011, at 3:21 AM, Usman Latif wrote:
Assigning a /64 is crazy... You should not be assigning your residential customers only a single subnet. Ideally, they should receive a /48, but, at an absolute minimum, I would think a /56.
It's not about counting hosts. IPv6 was designed around the idea that counting hosts should be unnecessary and the 64 bits you are now complaining about wasting were added for the purpose of using them in this fashion. If they hadn't been allocated to this purpose, likely IPv6 would have been a 64 bit address rather than a 128 bit address.
Yes... You are most definitely suffering from IPv4-think mindset. To deploy IPv6 properly and not in a manner which will detract from the development of better end user technologies, you really need to move beyond the scarcity mindset. As I have said several times. let's try allocating IPv6 as it was intended (/48 per end site regardless
of whether it's residential, commercial, etc.) and if we use up even so much as 20 /12s in less than 50 years, I will accept that we need to consider more conservative
This won't create a need to reclaim. The safety valve I am suggesting (at 20 /12s) leaves us with more than 3,564 /12s still in reserve to use with a more conservative allocation policy. (that without invading c000::/3 which is where multicast, link local, etc. are all reserved).
You shouldn't have to go blind. You should be able to do it by simply recognizing that the design of the protocol is different in this way and that those 64 bits were added for that purpose.