On Oct 24, 2010, at 6:48 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote: > In a message written on Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 05:23:14PM -0700, Owen DeLong > wrote: >> On Oct 23, 2010, at 8:03 AM, Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Leo Bicknell <bickn...@ufp.org> wrote: >>>> There are some folks (like me) who advocate a DHCPv6 that can convey >>>> a default gateway AND the ability to turn off RA's entirely. That >>>> is make it work like IPv4. >>>> >>> I'd also love to turn off stateless autoconfig altogether and not be coerced >>> to assign /64s to single LANs, which I am becoming convinced that it was a >>> poor decision on the IETFs part. >>> >> Nah... The /64 thing is fine. If they hadn't done that, we likely would have >> only >> a 64-bit address space total. 64-bit lans with 64-bit routing identifiers >> are >> fine. > > I think the 64-bit boundry is fine (from a DHCP perspective). I > do think if we're going to update the DHCP spec it should support > a netmask option, just because leaving it out is short sighted to > the future, but I would use it with /64's today. > My understanding was DHCPv6 did support prefixes other than /64.
>> There really is no need for anything smaller than /64. What, exactly, do you >> think you gain from a smaller netmask? > > There is a slippery slope here, if users make do with smaller > providers may give out smaller blocks, and so on. > Yeah, that could be worse than neutral. Still there's no gain to smaller than /64, only loss... > That said, if a provider does hand out a /64, I would very much > like technology to make 16 bits of subnet + 48 bits of host, with > EUI-48 used directly for autoconf as an option. Particularly when > we talk about 6rd and other things that use a lot of space this > option would be huge. Users would still get 16 bits of subnet, and > host space so big they could never fill it. > I think that ship has pretty well sailed, but, it might be a good future workaround if providers start doing stupid pet tricks like assigning single /64s to end customers. Owen
