nanog mailing list archives

Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too


From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 18:17:58 -0500

On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Mark Andrews <marka () isc org> wrote:


On 22 Dec 2017, at 3:48 am, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
wrote:

2) For the transition technology discussion I believe it centered around
attempting to get a /48 to each 'site' (home/customer) and doing ds-lite
as
the transition technology in use.
  (map the customer to not a /128 in the ds-lite, but a /48)

I think you mean 6rd.  DS-Lite doesn’t use any extra IPv6 addresses.


yes, sure, it was some time ago that the discussion happened :(


6rd can be poorly done by embedding the entire IPv4 address in the IPv6
address.  Doing that does waste space.

6rd deployment should not require much more IPv6 /48’s than a native IPv6
deployment would.  That does require properly configuring your DHCPv4
servers with DIFFERENT 6rd DHCPv4 Option values on a per IPv4 DHCP pool
basis which I’m sure every ISP here is capable of doing as there is nothing
really new here to do. You have all carved up IPv4 assignments into IPv4
pools.  This is no different.  You carve up a IPv6 assignments into similar
sized pools of /48’s then set the 6rd DHCPv4 Option to the appropriate
values for that IPv4 to IPv6 pool mapping.  Add the mapping to the BRs and
you are done.

Mark
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742              INTERNET: marka () isc org




Current thread: