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

[Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 2:51 AM, Ted Lemon <[e-mail]> wrote:

> So you want the device to be able to use DHCPv6-PD on the upstream, but
> support SLAAC on the downstream.   So this really isn’t a general
> mechanism: it’s for the smartphone router use case specifically.
>

Or for laptops that want to run VMs. Or for future protocols that need more
space, or for applications that want per-application IP-addresses. Or
anything else.

What this gives you is that on a network that has tracking requirements
that require the use of DHCPv6, then DHCPv6 can be used all the way to
"where the buck stops", i.e., all the way to the end user of the network.
The end user can then use other mechanisms, such as SLAAC or bridging, to
extend the network.

There are 256 times as many /40s as IPv4 addresses.   That’s a _really_
> small number unless you see the Internet growth curve flattening out, and
> your draft suggests that you don't.
>

The draft only recommends using DHCPv6 PD on if the network "requires
explicit requests for address space". That rules out anything running
SLAAC, which is supported by the vast majority of IPv6 deployments today.
If you want the draft to recommend that networks should not require
explicit requests for address space, then it can do that.