Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Stuart Henderson
Date: Wednesday, January 9, 2008 - 4:16 am

On 2008/01/09 11:04, Stiphane Chausson wrote:

http://signal.eu.org/blog/2007/12/12/ipv6-chez-free/ is informative
too. (this is also in french).


rfc4291 says:

   For all unicast addresses, except those that start with the binary
   value 000, Interface IDs are required to be 64 bits long and to be
   constructed in Modified EUI-64 format.

so if you further divide a /64 into multiple subnets you aren't
compliant with the standards, and you break the usual ipv6 address
autoconfiguration method.

the current _guidelines_ (not requirements) for allocations to
subscribers are given in rfc3177:

[...]

    - /48 in the general case, except for very large subscribers
    - /64 when it is known that one and only one subnet is needed by
      design
    - /128 when it is absolutely known that one and only one device is
      connecting.

   In particular, we recommend:

      -  Home network subscribers, connecting through on-demand or
         always-on connections should receive a /48.
      -  Small and large enterprises should receive a /48.
      -  Very large subscribers could receive a /47 or slightly shorter
         prefix, or multiple /48's.
      -  Mobile networks, such as vehicles or mobile phones with an
         additional network interface (such as bluetooth or 802.11b)
         should receive a static /64 prefix to allow the connection of
         multiple devices through one subnet.
      -  A single PC, with no additional need to subnet, dialing-up from
         a hotel room may receive its /128 IPv6 address for a PPP style
         connection as part of a /64 prefix.

   Note that there seems to be little benefit in not giving a /48 if
   future growth is anticipated.  In the following, we give the
   arguments for a uniform use of /48 and then demonstrate that it is
   entirely compatible with responsible stewardship of the total IPv6
   address space.

[...]

there are some suggestions out (see recent nanog posts) that /56 be
used for private consumer subscribers, though this is probably not
useful for all but the largest consumer ISPs.
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Good Good, (Tue Jan 8, 1:52 pm)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Marc Balmer, (Tue Jan 8, 2:15 pm)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Stuart Henderson, (Tue Jan 8, 4:16 pm)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Simon Vallet, (Wed Jan 9, 2:44 am)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Stéphane Chausson, (Wed Jan 9, 3:04 am)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Olivier Mehani, (Wed Jan 9, 3:45 am)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Simon Vallet, (Wed Jan 9, 3:59 am)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Claudio Jeker, (Wed Jan 9, 4:10 am)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Stuart Henderson, (Wed Jan 9, 4:16 am)