nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 daydreams
From: Peter Dambier <peter () peter-dambier de>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:43:52 +0200
From an end-user: I dont know what I should need an /64 for but it's barf, barf anyhow. My routing table is telling me I have got a /124 only: The tunnel (network) *::0 The end of the tunnel *::1 Me *::2 The tunnel broadcast *::3 Right now I have the impression we are only enusers. Right now I have the impression we are all connected to the same university PC running BSD something. Ok, today I have some NATted stuff that would be fond of its own ip. Kicking my NAT-box out I could grow my hair again. No more worring who needs what port and why. Beware! Who is printing all those bank listings on my new printer. It was a wholesale networkprinter. Just plug it into the power and print. Must have been stolen from the bank of china because it is all chines companies. And why is that van with the ice cream waiting in front of my neighour? It is me who ordered the icream. They have thrown out their freecer. I dont know why. It was working perfectly. I had no problems connecting it to my wlan and ordering. They did not even care about my bank account beeing empty. They told me I had enough credit to by their company. Sorry I have to stop now. Some policemen want to talk with me about a major fraud done with my IPv6 tunnel. See you later :) Jeroen Massar wrote:
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 02:52 +0000, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:On Sat, 15 Oct 2005, Tony Li wrote:Hopefully, that will reach a point where the operators show up and participate at IETF, rather than the IETF coming to NANOG.agreed.Full ack. Ops should really realize that they can have a lot of influence in the processes and what is actually being standardized. Which really helps the ops a lot as they then have an extra foot in the door at the Vendors, as the IETF is also known as the IVTF as some people like to call it :) On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 09:15 +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:On 17/10/05, David Barak <thegameiam () yahoo com> wrote:I'd change the allocation approach: rather than give every customer a /64, which represents an IPv4 universe full of IPv4 universes, I'd think that any customer can make do with a single IPv4-size universe, and make the default end-customer allocation a /96.I personally am in favor of reducing minimum allocations like this - and as was discussed quite extensively in the "botnet of toasters and microwave ovens when you ipv6 enable the lot" thread a few weeks back, it usually ends up that there's just one host in a /48 or /64 so that the sparsely populated v6 address space means bots cant go scanning IP space for vulnerable hosts like they do in v4There is a current document out for trying to get this stepped back to a /56 for _enduser_ sites. Corporate / Organisational / Business sites should then still get a /48. HD ratio docs: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2005-1.html http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2005-08.html Endsite definition: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2005-4.html As a note, out of my IPv6 /48, at home, I only use one /64 as I bridged the wireless and wired networks. This was easier than having Samba do remote announces to the other /64 and also allows me to re-attach my laptop and plug it into the wired without it changing the IP, very cheap 'mobility' :) A /56 for 'home usage', thus having 2^8 = 256 /64's or subnets would IMHO (force me to drink beer when this ever turns out to be wrong :) be enough for most home usages. I really don't see people installing 200+ routed networks in a home. Most people don't even have more than 4 rooms and one /64 already contains 2^64 addresses, unless we go for the IP-per-carpet-fiber approach, just give the carpet in your house a single /64 and you still have 255 subnets to go...It also means that when Vint Cerf's research about extending the internet into outer space comes through (or when we finally start exchanging email, http or whatever traffic with aliens), there's sooner or later going to be an intergalactic assembly of some sort where delegations from Betelgeuse and Magrathea will complain about how those @^$^$#^$^ earthlings hogged all the v6 space thinking there's more than enough v6 IP space to allot a /48 to every single molecule on earth, so now they're not getting enough IP space to network a group of computers that'll plot the answer to life, the universe and everything.They don't need to, this computer is already there, it is Earth..... there just ain't no plotter installed and we will be destroyed for that superhighway and then re-built as Earth 2, but we won't notice that :)Well, I know that sounds silly, but people were handing out class A, B and C space for years thinking nobody at all would run out of v4 space, there's lots of it so why not just parcel it out with open hands.The Huitema-Durand / Host-Density (HD) ratio RFC3194 it explains quite a number of these issues and covers most of them. Next to that note that 2000::/3 is only 1/8th of the total IPv6 address space. If we peep up, we can do that 8 times before the address space is full and I am quite sure if 2000::/3 runs out that people will start having some really loud discussions. Indeed 2000::/3 would then be similar to 'class A' space...Back to operations - there was this interesting proposal - well, two proposals as it turned out - at apnic 20 - http://www.apnic.net/meetings/20/report.htmlSimilar to the one done above in the RIPE region :) Greets, Jeroen
-- Peter and Karin Dambier Public-Root Graeffstrasse 14 D-64646 Heppenheim +49-6252-671788 (Telekom) +49-179-108-3978 (O2 Genion) +49-6252-750308 (VoIP: sipgate.de) mail: peter () peter-dambier de mail: peter () echnaton serveftp com http://iason.site.voila.fr http://www.kokoom.com/iason
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 news, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 news John Reilly (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 news Joe Abley (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 news Randy Bush (Oct 16)
- IPv6 daydreams David Barak (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Randy Bush (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Randy Bush (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams bmanning (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Randy Bush (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Suresh Ramasubramanian (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Jeroen Massar (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Peter Dambier (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Paul G (Oct 17)
- Message not available
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Peter Dambier (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Mark Smith (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Randy Bush (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Mark Smith (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Kevin Loch (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams David Barak (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Jeroen Massar (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Paul Jakma (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams David Conrad (Oct 18)