On Jan 25, 2011, at 8:47 PM, George Bonser wrote: > > >> From: Adrian Chadd >> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 8:37 PM >> To: Owen DeLong >> Cc: nanog@nanog.org >> Subject: Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN >> >> (Top-posting because the whole message is context. Oh, and I'm lazy.) >> >> I do indeed love it when people break out IPv6 addressing as >> "there's so many addresses, we'll never ever go through them!" >> >> Sure, if they're only used as end-point identifiers. >> > > Yeah, at some point v6 IP addresses might be used for something > completely different. For example, rather than using a cookie to > balance through a load balancer to get back to a server in a "sticky > session", maybe you are redirected directly to an IP address on the > server that represents your session. The IP address could be > provisioned dynamically on the server as required, the user hits the > main URL and is "redirected" to the unique IP address representing their > session. > There isn't a web farm big enough for that not to still work within a /64. Since a web farm network would be a /64 anyway, this isn't an increase in the consumption of IPv6 addresses.
> If you have a 64-bit address, each active session can easily be given > its own unique IP. I can see requirements at some point for servers to > be able to handle thousands of IP addresses per interface. > Many already can. Owen
