nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?)
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 17:44:50 +0200
I think, the length of Interface ID be 64 is so mostly because IEEE works now with 64bit EUI identifiers (instead of older 48bit MAC addresses). I.e. compatibility between IEEE and IETF IPv6 would be the main reason for this Interface ID to be 64. And this is so, even though there are IEEE links for which the MAC address is even shorter than 64bit, like 802.15.4 short addresses being on 16bit. For those, an IPv6 prefix length of 112bit would even make sense. But it's not done, because same IEEE which says the 15.4 MAC address is 16bit says that its EUI is 64bit. (what 'default' fill that with is what gets into an IPv6 address as well). The good thing isthere is nothing in the RFC IPv6 Addressing Architecture that makes the Interface ID to be MUST 64bit. It just says 'n'. What there _is_, is that when using RFC stateless addess autoconfiguration (not DHCP) and on Ethernet and its keen (WiFi, Bluetooth, ZigBee, more; but not USB nor LTE for example) then one must use Interface ID of 64bit; and consequently network prefix length of 64bit no more. Alex Le 06/06/2012 16:58, Chuck Church a écrit :
Does anyone know the reason /64 was proposed as the size for all L2 domains? I've looked for this answer before, never found a good one. I thought I read there are some L2 technologies that use a 64 bit hardware address, might have been Bluetooth. Guaranteeing that ALL possible hosts could live together in the same L2 domain seems like overkill, even for this group. /80 would make more sense, it does match up with Ethernet MACs. Not as easy to compute, for humans nor processors that like things in 32 or 64 bit chunks however. Anyone have a definite answer? Thanks, Chuck -----Original Message----- From: Jean-Francois.TremblayING () videotron com [mailto:Jean-Francois.TremblayING () videotron com] Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 10:36 AM To: anton () huge geek nz Cc: NANOG list Subject: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Anton Smith <anton () huge geek nz> a écrit sur 06/06/2012 09:53:02 AM :Potentially silly question but, as Bill points out a LAN always occupies a /64. Does this imply that we would have large L2 segments with a large number of hosts on them? What about the age old discussion about keeping broadcast segments small?The /64 only removes the limitation on the number of *addresses* on the L2 domain. Limitations still apply for the amount of ARP and ND noise. A maximum number of hosts is reached when that noise floor represents a significant portion of the link bandwidth. If ARP/ND proxying is used, the limiting factor may instead be the CPU on the gateway. The ND noise generated is arguably higher than ARP because of DAD, but I don't remember seeing actual numbers on this (anybody?). I've seen links with up to 15k devices where ARP represented a significant part of the link usage, but most weren't (yet) IPv6. /JF
Current thread:
- IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?), (continued)
- IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Jean-Francois . TremblayING (Jun 06)
- RE: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Chuck Church (Jun 06)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Dale W. Carder (Jun 06)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Owen DeLong (Jun 06)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Steve Clark (Jun 06)
- Message not available
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Owen DeLong (Jun 06)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Masataka Ohta (Jun 06)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Ricky Beam (Jun 07)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Owen DeLong (Jun 07)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Alexandru Petrescu (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Alexandru Petrescu (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Owen DeLong (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Karl Auer (Jun 06)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Ricky Beam (Jun 07)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Dave Hart (Jun 07)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Karl Auer (Jun 07)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Dave Hart (Jun 07)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Karl Auer (Jun 07)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Mark Andrews (Jun 07)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Karl Auer (Jun 07)
- Re: IPv6 /64 links (was Re: ipv6 book recommendations?) Dave Hart (Jun 07)