IETF Logo Mail Archive

[v6ops] Re: [dhcwg] Re: Re: [IPv6]Re: Android now supports DHCPv6 PD

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 17 September 2025 15:54 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: v6ops@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: v6ops@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CAC66456484 for <v6ops@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 08:54:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ucTa57PRX0dR for <v6ops@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 08:54:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F0136456472 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 08:54:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30A2D18011; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 11:54:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with LMTP id XPyeOPRYvIVo; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 11:54:21 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1758124461; bh=qbCIlfYHuO3LbElW3JaJbOfChjxjXbhvCoP2ef6PIog=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=du3StxLGWGYpaa3TbojAAUEYPVsopzaLK4Dvh4xKTYseJvQGlBQiueMn8FHFKwFTT PMbqjiz6RSGWA2qrgP35kJGx/1CIVvyM1s8tAE3J11tLfLt5NHR9jEnAyXU18AWxub R0BUiy+Utm+I8rLWCqP0NXXSvwx2wEaJeNoIU3hF4iPJyml2pHLdPbUhAQnanFzl7J hiIwhQWLfpFzj92iB8mq2NGTX5WjnJTtpRxWpFFdprm636VaHg3kfYmanF/Gkm4BJ4 QhBILiQXOe9DzBW00Gq37VWxYS0YDgmW5wPmhKNdApSq3+ethHuIq0xz79+hOhJuNg vq6Sy/y1FIEeQ==
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2:b241:6fff:fe09:a92b]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 807741800D; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 11:54:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CDE71EA; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 11:54:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Tim Chown <Tim.Chown=40jisc.ac.uk@dmarc.ietf.org>, "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <DB9PR07MB7771A785A9FF09DEA6E66D7DD614A@DB9PR07MB7771.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAKD1Yr1XKoBNJqBbuiR1ZthZPTqaN+099RdhhHTSSGJBF5EUpw@mail.gmail.com> <CAP6_FRxO5Oem05cAMOuKK=ckR6VOG_pQteJzNkjES6czSVmvdw@mail.gmail.com> <CANP3RGcAhHX859-9EW4ozUJYYHaeaYsK7pqbBb-ytuqyT-ZTEw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr32GdvEhh7kKCuPT3RGoKo0ojo-W6Kiy-euD1aP9RjpLg@mail.gmail.com> <DB9PR07MB7771A785A9FF09DEA6E66D7DD614A@DB9PR07MB7771.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.8+dev; GNU Emacs 28.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0;<'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2025 11:54:21 -0400
Message-ID: <9081.1758124461@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Message-ID-Hash: LQFLVUEECZYI4UZ3IFKVY7ISQSTHKLKG
X-Message-ID-Hash: LQFLVUEECZYI4UZ3IFKVY7ISQSTHKLKG
X-MailFrom: mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-v6ops.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [v6ops] Re: [dhcwg] Re: Re: [IPv6]Re: Android now supports DHCPv6 PD
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/8fsPdt67SpCxxCHYiN3kyzgLJ4E>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:v6ops-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:v6ops-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:v6ops-leave@ietf.org>

Tim Chown <Tim.Chown=40jisc.ac.uk@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
    > highlighted in your email.  The linked article explains “what this
    > means for app developers” but a “what this means for enterprise/campus
    > network operators” would be useful.

I think we have to write that BCP :-)
Maybe at RIPE.

    > Is it a given that in a middling or large campus the operator will need
    > to now receive more than a /48 from their NREN?  Or was that always too
    > cautious?  A small but growing number here are obtaining LIR status
    > directly.

It seems like a good problem to have.
Unless you are worried about the NREN trying to front-end allocations for all
time.  I think that's a mistake: v6 pool is quite deep.   

64K /64s in a /48 means lots of space for university with 20K students.
4K  /60s in a /48. Most Canadian universities have less than 4K students.
UoT has 71,000.  Let's call it 100K devices.  But UoT has multiple campuses,
and having a /48 per campus seems sensible... if not I think a /40 would be
plenty for our biggest campus.  
utoronto.ca is outsourced, I can't see how space they have, if any.

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status