Greenfield IPv4 + IPv6 broadband deployment

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

I'm not sure if what you're describing is the same what we did already in
some deployments and we described in an IETF ID:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-palet-v6ops-point2point-01

The ID didn't progressed because there was not agreement in v6ops to go
that way.

I still believe it is an interesting option.

Comments welcome, and actually if someone else is deploying this way, I
will be interested to continue the work in the draft and incorporating
other authors.

Regards,
Jordi






-----Mensaje original-----
De: Frank Bulk <frnkblk at iname.com>
Responder a: <frnkblk at iname.com>
Fecha: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:35:08 -0600
Para: 'Adam Armstrong' <lists at memetic.org>, Dan White <dwhite at olp.net>,
IPv6 operators forum <ipv6-ops at lists.cluenet.de>
Asunto: RE: Greenfield IPv4 + IPv6 broadband deployment

>If you use the 1:1 model with Q-in-Q where each VLAN has it's own RA
>configuration with unique /64, then you could have a unique pool per VLAN
>with just one customer block (48 or 56 or 60 or 64) per pool.  I don't
>plan
>to implement that way, but that would be possible.  Of course, if they
>change CPE then the pool would be out of IP addresses until the previous
>lease expired.
>
>Frank
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ipv6-ops-bounces+frnkblk=iname.com at lists.cluenet.de
>[mailto:ipv6-ops-bounces+frnkblk=iname.com at lists.cluenet.de] On Behalf Of
>Adam Armstrong
>Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2011 6:24 PM
>To: Dan White; IPv6 operators forum
>Subject: Re: Greenfield IPv4 + IPv6 broadband deployment
>
>On 26/02/2011 23:30, Dan White wrote:
>> On 26/02/11 18:07 +0000, Adam Armstrong wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I'm currently in the planning stages of a large scale broadband
>>> deployment, with the hopes of doing sane dual-stacked v4/v6 to every
>>> subscriber from day one.
>>>
>>> I know the CPE issue has been talked about to death, and I'm pretty
>>> unhappy with the situation there at the moment, but for the time
>>> being I'm assuming CPE are not an issue.
>>>
>>> All transport is ethernet, with subs being dragged back to a small
>>> number of central gateways. I'm looking at a mix of DHCP and
>>> DHCPv6-PD to distribute addresses. PPP isn't an option.
>>
>> Some of this has already been mentioned by Frank and Martin and others.
>>
>> I'd recommend investing in a good router (or routers) which support
>> subscriber management, and try to design your network so that your
>> customers terminate to it via Q-in-Q VLANs (or ATM or PPPoX where
>> appropriate), and handle your layer-3 enforcement on that router rather
>> than at the edge.
>
>That's the plan currently. Purely layer 2 back a couple of very large
>devices doing layer 3 aggregation. Still deciding on 1:1 or 1:N VLANs.
>
>> Assign static v4 addresses, or enforce DHCPv4 leases on the router. Use
>> proxy ARP to allow customers to talk to each other if you want (a good
>> subscriber management router is going to have all that).
>> For IPv6, assign or identify customers via subnet rather than
>> individual v6
>> addresses, where you can get away with it. Assign a /64 per layer-2
>> broadcast domain (one broadcast domain per customer if you can), and
>> provide a unique RA per customer. Set up a pool of DHCPv6-PD subnets
>>(/56
>> or /48 per customer) that customer routers can request from, or
>> configure a
>> static DHCPv6-PD pool per customer if that makes sense. Configure the
>> 'Other configuration' flag in your RAs so customer routers retrieve DNS
>> servers dynamically.
>
>My primary issue at the moment is that I can't see a clean way to manage
>100K static v6 prefixes via DHCP.
>
>It's possible I'm missing something obvious, but it doesn't seem to be
>coming to me no matter how hard I look.
>
>> Consider how you're
>> going to handle the inevitable abuse complaints your
>> going to receive (SPAM and Copyright violations), and how you're going
>> to identify which customer triggered the complaint.
>Argh :)
>
>adam.
>
>
>
>



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.