RE: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable?

[Adam Thompson <athompson () merlin mb ca>]

I may have mis-read it (I admit I didn’t read it all that carefully) but I think RFC3531 is talking about the strategy 
for assigning /64s out of a larger pool (a /56, say).
-Adam

Adam Thompson
Consultant, Infrastructure Services
MERLIN
100 - 135 Innovation Drive
Winnipeg, MB R3T 6A8
(204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only)
https://www.merlin.mb.ca<https://www.merlin.mb.ca/>
Chat with me on Teams<https://teams.microsoft.com/l/chat/0/0?users=athompson () merlin mb ca>

From: Mel Beckman <mel () beckman org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:13 PM
To: Adam Thompson <athompson () merlin mb ca>
Cc: nanog <nanog () nanog org>
Subject: Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable?

I never could understand the motivation behind RFC3531. Just assign /64s. A single /64 subnet has 
18,446,744,073,709,551,616  host addresses.  It is enough. Period.




 -mel


On May 14, 2024, at 12:54 PM, Adam Thompson <athompson () merlin mb ca<mailto:athompson () merlin mb ca>> wrote:

Not an IPv6 newbie by any stretch, but we still aren’t doing it “at scale” and some of you are, so…

For a very small & dense (on 128-bit scales, anyway) network, is RFC3531 still the last word in IPv6 allocation 
strategies?

Right now, we’re just approaching it as “pick the next /64 in the range”, as it all gets aggregated at the BGP border 
anyway, and internally if I really try hard, I might get to 200 subnets someday.

Is there any justification for the labour in doing something more complex like center-allocation in my situation?  
Worrying about allocation strategies seems appropriate to me if you have 100,000 subnets, not 100.

Opinions wanted, please.
-Adam

Adam Thompson
Consultant, Infrastructure Services
MERLIN
100 - 135 Innovation Drive
Winnipeg, MB R3T 6A8
(204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only)
https://www.merlin.mb.ca<https://www.merlin.mb.ca/>
Chat with me on Teams<https://teams.microsoft.com/l/chat/0/0?users=athompson () merlin mb ca>