extending at the edge - Yes!
thomas at cis.uni-muenchen.de
Fri Oct 12 22:59:22 CEST 2012
Am Freitag, 12. Oktober 2012 um 22:02:13 schrieb Philipp Kern:
> having suffered this with a German server provider… we really don't want
> this as a general solution. Especially given the fact that a static table
> of addresses won't help you with privacy addresses and such.
Of course dhcpv6pd with greater networks would better and every kind of NAT
would be worse.
It is not a general solution, but it is one solution.
I did the test with a IPv6-enabled test-SIM from a german provider.
> Sure, it works for a very limited set of machines,
I don't think so. All components are available.
vanilla - linux -kernel
iproute2 (ip) tools
ndppd is new and makes the management of the ndp-proxy-entries easier, so
privacy extensions should still work.
This could be easily integrated in (3G/4G)routers or smartphones.
/64 per user seems to become common use.
Fighting for /56 or /48 per user at mobile-devices could end in a disaster and
we get hostroutes, not shareable without NATPT.
> but it's pretty ugly.
It is not nice. But it is a routing solution and stable. (unlike todays NAT)
As long IPv6-enabled hardware (e.g. some surfsticks I have) do only provide
/64 ( I get the net-prefix-info via SLAAC, not via DHCP) I see no chance and
no need for a change.
The existing surfsticks work very easily with slaa-configuration for everyday
life, the special sharing situation needs a little effort.
In the case of dhcp-pd the everday life is more complicated, and you have only
small advantages for the case of sharing.
Wasting 2⁶⁴-addresses for one device is very much but delegating /48 is much
more wasting - most people are probably not sharing their net. But it is
important that they could!
> PS: The documentation prefix is 2001:db8::/32. ;-)
You are right, I saw that after the mail was already sent.
More information about the ipv6-ops