Re: 64share v2 Tue, 10 November 2020 15:38 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B03FB3A02BB for <>; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 07:38:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id waW2nqPA2Ort for <>; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 07:38:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB0053A0138 for <>; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 07:38:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (unknown [IPv6:2a01:79c:cebd:9724:d56d:6e55:37f1:848f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E89B94E11B3B; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 15:38:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 219D843B83D2; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:38:50 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.\))
Subject: Re: 64share v2
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:38:49 +0100
Cc: 6man WG <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 15:38:54 -0000


> Ole, I do not understand what you are asking.
> network A is allocating to rotuer B over a point-to-point link a prefix.  (The router might be a 3GPP UE.  It might be a fixed wireless RG. Doesn't matter.)
> If there is a network behind B, the B can use that prefix for that network.  Obviously, if it is multi-hop network and we want to get multiple levels of allocation, then other tools are needed.  That was the homenet problem.
> This approach does not claim to solve the whole homenet problem.  It solves a simple and common problem.

In the 64share solution the prefix is assigned to the _link_ between then PE and the CE.
The CE steals that prefix and assigns it to downstream interfaces.

In PD the prefix is delegated (as in the authority of the prefix changes) to the CE.

Do you understand the difference? And the implications of that difference?

I.e. that prefix lifetime is limited to the lifetime of the connection.
Again, we do not know how to operate networks with rapidly changing addresses.