Hi Erik, > -----Original Message----- > From: Erik Kline [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 10:46 AM > To: Templin, Fred L > Cc: Nick Hilliard; Cricket Liu; [email protected]; > [email protected]; > Mark Boolootian > Subject: Re: Question about IPAM tools for v6 > > On 31 January 2014 10:22, Templin, Fred L <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Not if you route a /64 to each host (the way 3GPP/LTE does for mobiles). > >> :-) > > > > A /64 for each mobile is what I would expect. It is then up to the > > mobile to manage the /64 responsibly by either black-holing the > > portions of the /64 it is not using or by assigning the /64 to a > > link other than the service provider wireless access link (and > > then managing the NC appropriately). > > <wasn't specifically directed at anyone> > > Yep. My point, though, was that we can do the same kind of thing in > the datacenter.
Sure, that works for me too. > <dangerously philosophical> > > In general, I think ND exhaustion is one of those "solve it at Layer > 3" situations, since we have the bits to do so. > > IPv6 gives us a large enough space to see new problems of scale, and > sometimes the large enough space can be used to solve these problems > too, albeit with non-IPv4 thinking. Right - thanks for clarifying. Thanks - Fred [email protected]
