Re: Node Requirements: Elevating DHCPv6 from MAY to SHOULD

[Mohacsi Janos <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, 31 May 2011, Markus Hanauska wrote:

>
> On 2011-05-31, at 12:10 , Mohacsi Janos wrote:
>
>> If you get /64 and you need more subnets from your provider then probably you asked something wrong.
>
> Or you have the wrong provider...

I agree.

> but if this is the only provider 
> available in your area, that can offer you a symmetric 100 MBit/s fibre 
> connection for business purposes, what are you going to do? Move your 
> whole company elsewhere? I don't think so. Sometimes it is also a 
> question of money; you can have a larger prefix, if you are willing to 
> pay ten times the price, which is not acceptable for every company in 
> the world.

You have to explain your provider to assign more otherwise they are not 
following the registration policy documents of RIRs e.g Section 5.3 
and 5.4.x
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-512


>
>> What collision? You should use 'u' bit accrdingly:
>> 1 - if automaticaly assigned
>> 0 - if manually assigned.
>
> But it is also 0 for SLAAC addresses w/ privacy extension and those are automatically assigned, in example.


You can argument for change in the RFC 4941 revision.

Best Regards,
 		Janos Mohacsi