In a message written on Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 01:07:15PM -0500, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: > On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 09:38:12 EST, Joe Maimon said: > > rfc3927 does not require 64 bits and works sufficiently well wherever it > > is employed. SLAAC should be redesigned to be configurable to work with > > however many bits are available to it and it should be a standard > > feature to turn that knob all the way from on - off with 128 bit stops > > in between. > > Feel free to explain how SLAAC should work on a /96 with 32 bits of host > address > (or any amount smaller than the 48 bits most MAC addresses provide). Remember > in your answer to deal with collisions.
Well, I at least think an option should be a /80, using the 48 bits
of MAC directly. This generates exactly the same collision potential
as today we have with a /64 and an EUI-64 constructed from an EUI-48
ethernet address. The router is already sending RA's for SLAAC to
work, sending along one of a well-known set of masks would be a
relatively minor modification.
That said, ND has built into it DAD - Duplicate Address Detection.
There is already an expectation that there will be collisions, and
the protocols to detect them are already in place. I see little
to no reason you couldn't use a different length subnet (like the
/96 in your example), randomly select an address and do DAD to see
if it is in use. Indeed, this is pretty much how AppleTalk back
in the day worked (with a 16 bit number space).
The probability of collision is pretty low, and the penalty/recovery
(picking a new address and trying again) is rather quick and cheap.
If a service provider is going to end up giving me a /64 at home (I
know, a whole different argument) I'd vastly prefer to use /80 or /96
subnets with either of these methods, and still be able to subnet the
space. I suspect if /64's are given out one or both will come to be
"standard".
--
Leo Bicknell - bickn...@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
pgp9s6W9xlusw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
