end user assignment best practice

[Mohacsi Janos]

On Mon, 18 Mar 2013, Ron Vachiyer wrote:

> We are looking at our model for deploying IPv6 /48 prefixes to end sites.  Currently, we are suppying a /29 or /30 IPv4 subnet, and the end customer provides
> a router/firewall that typically will be doing NAT.  We supply a customer edge device that utilizes the first IP of the v4 subnet assigned to the customer on
> the "LAN" interface, and the "WAN" interface is numbered with RFC 1918 space.  This allows us to have one numbered interface and one static route per
> customer.
> 
> In the case of an IPv6 prefix, the "WAN" interface of the device we provide will be using a /64 prefix taken from a pool set aside for loopbacks.  Is it
> acceptable practice to number the "LAN" interface using a /64 taken from the /48 assigned for the customer, or is it current practice to use a second /64
> outside of the /48 to route the /48 to customer equipment?  In other words, in a scenario such as this, are we to provide [/64 + /64 + /48] or [/64 + (/48 -
> /64)] to the end site?
> 
> Thanks for any input or RTFM material on the subject,

Really depends on your aggreement with your user:
- You can borow one /64 from them
- Or use another /64 from your space

Analyse in you environment advantages and tradeoffs...

But be consistent with all your users....
 	Regards,
 			Janos

> 
> Ron
> 
> 
>