Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-colitti-v6ops-host-addr-availability-01.txt

[Alexandru Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 30/07/2015 17:49, Templin, Fred L a écrit :
> Hi Philip,
>
>> -----Original Message----- From: v6ops
>> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Philip Homburg Sent:
>> Thursday, July 30, 2015 8:38 AM To: [e-mail] Subject: Re:
>> [v6ops] I-D Action:
>> draft-colitti-v6ops-host-addr-availability-01.txt
>>
>>> I agree. We also need to remember that each device that gets a
>>> /64 can connect countless billions of other devices using the
>>> available /64 prefix space.
>>
>> I'm not saying that we should give every device a /64 using
>> DHCP-PD. SLAAC is probably a much better way to distribute
>> addresses locally (at least as long as we don't mess up IIDs
>> completely).
>
> You can't give a device a /64 using SLAAC;

I agree.

> SLAAC only allows for autoconfiguration of singleton addresses taken
>  from an on-link /64 prefix.

Yes.

> If you want to give a device a /64, the only choices I am aware of
> are administrative configuration or DHCPv6 PD.

I agree.  In addition there may be something with EAP, IKE and OSPF.

> That said, once a device has received a /64, address delegation from
>  the /64 could certainly use SLAAC.

I disagree.  If a device can't get a /64 by using SLAAC then it can't
give a /64 using SLAAC either.  Although yes, if a device gets a /64
with DHCP-PD then it can RA with that /64 on its other interface, only
for the other devices on that other interface.

Alex

>
> Thanks - Fred [e-mail]
>
>> But, the addressing architecture does allow for one /64 per device.
>> So when needed, it is better to use that space than to add all
>> kinds of complexity while trying to save a few bits.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list
>> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list
> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>