Re: IPv6 fc00::/7 ??? Unique local addresses

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Oct 23, 2010, at 8:03 AM, Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo wrote:

> Amen!
>
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Leo Bicknell <bicknell () 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.

What would be nice would be if we changed the semantics a bit and made
it 16+48+64 where the first 16 of the dest+source could be re-assembled
into the destination ASN for the packet and the remaining 48 identified
a particular subnet globally with 64 for the host. Unfortunately, that ship
has probably sailed.

> Stateless autoconfig works very well, It would be just perfect if the
> network boundary was configurable (like say /64 if you really want it,  or
> /80 -  /96 for the rest of us)
There really is no need for anything smaller than /64.  What, exactly, do you
think you gain from a smaller netmask?

Owen