Re: Objection to draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt

Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Thu, 02 March 2017 18:24 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F0511295AF for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 10:24:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.353
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.353 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AlTTU_hjA21d for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 10:24:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 138121295B8 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 10:24:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide.extra.cea.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.4) with ESMTP id v22IOKLj019157; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 19:24:20 +0100
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id DC6D520D2AD; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 19:24:20 +0100 (CET)
Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF6A320D287; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 19:24:20 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [10.8.34.184] (is227335.intra.cea.fr [10.8.34.184]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.4) with ESMTP id v22IOKfS013754; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 19:24:20 +0100
Subject: Re: Objection to draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt
To: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
References: <20170223134026.GI5069@gir.theapt.org> <F7C230DE-4759-4B78-ABF2-6799F85B3C62@google.com> <58B014F6.2040400@foobar.org> <6DA95097-8730-4353-A0C9-3EB4719EA891@google.com> <CAKD1Yr0qk_njAGnex_FZsYisCVw=eM8hXTr1v+wqvcfX_09wiQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau0ohz3Wp55bs+eoFvSyoUjuKfjzKGSAsJS3wUt3z7TGtA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0wK8EiAbz39EZz-xZLtsSV2JROSzNECKtGo36Zc=RZ0Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau2N-fv3o9o4807m_fbMktjC6hq28sMZhfECKg5cbb4g6Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3tHm5x29w4L5KtKi7PqDHRxkPr6i9mJMtHLaPc2eM2GQ@mail.gmail.com> <20170302105206.15fc3886@echo.ms.redpill-linpro.com> <CAKD1Yr2AYaAQMuGZiKXYwKdgz1dzKs5fc5bm7hQjpuq3O_V8gQ@mail.gmail.com> <20170302121104.36ddda4e@echo.ms.redpill-linpro.com> <CAKD1Yr1cNihxMVHjY2j7mcCNU2TE0X6-0p2mDNCBVVUcUbU20Q@mail.gmail.com> <20170302153611.36506f85@envy> <CAKD1Yr1SbdE-i-oGhi2kEFBWTOi_-FzgVdMYkMWjCEtw0MRRMg@mail.gmail.com> <ee3b73b1-6! 4fd-6fef- bc0a-53b325f0bcfd@gmail.com> <2D14A5DE-E836-4C40-9B92-4A3D6BB3BC01@steffann.nl>
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <79c5f76a-8b15-b4cf-31e2-7e25f4f98318@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 19:24:26 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2D14A5DE-E836-4C40-9B92-4A3D6BB3BC01@steffann.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/Qz7qC1O3eG2AWCWgd-3yl9j_rGw>
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2017 18:24:25 -0000

Le 02/03/2017 à 18:49, Sander Steffann a écrit :
> Hi,
>
>> Ok, but maybe it's the operators running out of /64s, no?
>
> No

So why dont they give more than one such /64 to one end user?

>> I speculate, but I couldn't imagine a cellular operator dedicating
>> a /40, i.e. 2^24 /64s, i.e. the equivalent of a 10.x Class A, to
>> cover its end users.    (the cellular operator I work with
>> dedicates a /47 to cover its end users).
>
> A /40 is nothing.

??

> An operator get's a *minimum* of a /32,

I can agree to that.  But I am also familiar with the common practice to
use chunks of GUAs on the interconnection links (instead of LLs or
ULAs).  There too people say "we have enough of these IPv6 prefixes, no
worry".

But it's again speculation.

> and in RIPE land can get a /29 by just asking for it.

That looks simple.

> A /40 is less than 1/2048th of a small operator's address space.

Look, let us talk only about the cellular parts of a certain country of
what such an operator may get.  I can agree with you that an operator
may get much from RIPE, but I ask how much of it will she assign to its
end users on cellular links?

Do you know of a cellular operator assigning a shorter-than-/47 prefix
to cover its cellular end users?  I am not asking to name it, but
whether such thing exists is sufficient for me.

Alex

>
> Cheers, Sander
>