Current Consensus on IPv6 Customer Allocation Size

[Eugen Leitl]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 10:35:45PM +0100, Mark Blackman wrote:

> > In IPv6 land, your /64 is your /32 in IPv4. Given that some of
> > us run out of IPv4 /24 at home (nevermind the virtual hosts,
> > kilonode and meganode hardware is coming) a /48 for each 
> > residential user appears a no-brainer.
> 
> I'm arguing that's the uncommon case and operators should

Currently, absolutely. However, in future there tends to
be a feature creep, so I would overengineer today so that
I can last longer tomorrow.

> have a default prefix that's closer to the common case, but
> have some mechanism for allocating to self-described power-users.
> I could just about see a /56 by default, but not ever a /48 by
> default for a single family dwelling.

How much additional overhead is this? IPv6 isn't forever,
anyway. It would be prudent it lasts about as long as IPv4
did.
 
> A genuinely separate subnet is a management burden, which 

The interesting part is complete automation. The user 
wouldn't have the foggiest, it's all just automagick.

But I'd rather think of /64 for each device, not just
LAN segment. So /48 for each home makes sense.

> I'd guess that 95% or more of single family residential 
> customers simply aren't looking for.

Ideally, they would have no clue what this IPv4/IPv6 thing
is all about.