RE: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00

Hi Bert,

When you say "IoT", I think about my cellphone and all of its associated devices.
Or, my home router and all of the addressable devices in my home. Giving each
of them a /64 then allowing them to portion their /64s internally as they see fit
(e.g., subnetting to longer prefixes) would not lead to NAT AFAICT. And, the
address space may be used internally for multi-addressing purposes (e.g.,
privacy addresses, random interface identifiers, etc.) which is one of the
advantages of IPv6.

Thanks - Fred

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Manfredi, Albert E
> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2017 10:15 AM
> To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
> Cc: IETF IPv6 Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>
> Subject: RE: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00
> 
> >> Would be a shame to throw away lessons learned from IPv4.
> >
> > I think that's exactly the fallacy here. It is not useful to apply something
> > you learned about IPv4 addressing to IPv6, because the number of addresses
> > is incomparably bigger. Rule of thumb in software engineering is that a
> > solution usually scales by one or two orders of magnitude. Here we have
> > something like 34 orders of magnitude. Even a single /64 is 9 orders of
> > magnitude larger than the IPv4 Internet.
> 
> Yeah, this hype needs to end. A /64 hard boundary merely doubles the width of IPv4 addresses, and egregiously wastes the majority
> of the remaining 64 bits.  And with innovations such as IoT, suddenly all that vast extra space can be swallowed up. Back in 1980, IPv4
> address space seemed pretty huge too. The deployment assumptions made are key, when people make assertions about the
> vastness of the address space.
> 
> > Example: I don't want us to have to deal with NAT any more, ever.
> 
> I've seen this comment made before, and yet the /64 hard boundary practically guarantees that NAT will get used with IPv6. It's
> exactly the same solution, for exactly the same problem. Inability to expand at the edges.
> 
> Bert
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------