IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-collink-v6ops-ent64pd-01.txt

Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> Fri, 16 December 2022 01:18 UTC

Return-Path: <furry13@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFF90C13A064; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 17:18:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.848
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.848 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, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BbzUZig-Ytt0; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 17:18:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x12a.google.com (mail-lf1-x12a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94E54C13A040; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 17:18:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x12a.google.com with SMTP id q6so1155707lfm.10; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 17:18:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=4uaD6p2rx4PNxRQ2f7v22eFJas8P3vzSkXBMWgnYtCw=; b=Fi3Zn1TOiiQFeImEn1cKjVxa3/X2klvKeqdSIB1lHuprlphBX5YCWY/V5Sf6U4x3A9 yKV85TKc4oMxoOnnEWE3ftnzvFeJ170kK7RHa9rc6TA/xVxGDN4l678eHnFj11CyY5vc S+ZwzqSKQc/C2gBD1lDkI6GhYMhugH69dlkV+lm9uMFkTUWgeGy9xVL3vcdF5SFpdvwH W+VhBAv91SXBG3qs8J2TPZewzaGzbLg730OBccg/x4re3G2tQ5UGCmX0SGwNgZ3KQmlm q/ziz7Sg1bUgCoZoj8Jy2d9KG1bD3thnhlKiiFgjmxtsyhN9Dw4ZUls/HwWMYcve1TmH gQfg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=4uaD6p2rx4PNxRQ2f7v22eFJas8P3vzSkXBMWgnYtCw=; b=ESZEVG9VbSr7MqWp/7SgMeyAOGnxW/MHQnQtxaKftb47uTB67QD4CmgoFrJeiYbtgt YzB49SifJQNcVBnCVARQkDjjTcKjbBCEUMUD6W43C375PbAYDnGg0IR08bUjt/ZdGsS/ ZJQ8Xi6bVEUcDgIVc5N8+SK7JLMMkilrtjnF7ajD6bfGSNpzpwqwl29BqBhS6/F3WDKy 0SBYKKT8niDutzwk1ShJ4xHhMO9j+khym4l3eBcz8XdTAI5tNlrpkBEqqt0c4gkKSeSB 4Za56DRq2Wrsx1ZSyb4K/0QirZ9JR7lOu+ywM2/HuhsMzGKs+OGyE/W6S/LNCTKMQKIO Hsgg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pmt14wkLSXu5xhE2uU3fVaoXabBzWAp8BNuZXWaqnhqNV5d7OT5 dEyA3rMR6y1MDwFetJkmCOUhidBY05qgYSaiV9Y=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf5ZFhEUWVMXPK9i2b+iBxtV1DAo5gBXEzgFon28WqxesY+bn376noeyRbwMgjCCOYO3ABVMLIVV1ASX129SoIw=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4947:0:b0:4b5:b6e8:bb54 with SMTP id o7-20020ac24947000000b004b5b6e8bb54mr2351349lfi.396.1671153524204; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 17:18:44 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <167107554671.48477.568330207202509840@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAFU7BATp=gEB3S8AzhCYDMN3fzLQrYY9pzcWJ=LQnrjC9bRKEA@mail.gmail.com> <Y5sy2ikgQEWSnCsM@Space.Net>
In-Reply-To: <Y5sy2ikgQEWSnCsM@Space.Net>
From: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 12:18:32 +1100
Message-ID: <CAFU7BARgifbN0eOLoBi+KPTTsTjuSODti2FgepVrJZjQUY-dqA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
Cc: V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>, draft-collink-v6ops-ent64pd@ietf.org, xiaom@google.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/OebF1wLQ9x4hCVn0Fk6MbOmH050>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-collink-v6ops-ent64pd-01.txt
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 01:18:47 -0000

On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 1:44 AM Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote:
> I do not think that a /64 per host is reasonable address usage.

Well, when we assign /64 per vlan, most of those addresses are not
used either, right?

> To implement this, network admins need not only to add v6 subnets
> to broadcast segments but also add pools of sizeable size, which does
> create pressure in the /48.../64 range of the addresses they have
> ("one /48 per site").

Even 1 /48 per site gives you 65K /64s.
Also I do not think that "one /48 per site" is set in stone. It's
mostly because you can't assign less if you want local ISP egress -
but nothing would prevent you from assigning more.

> Something like a /96 per host - so "limitless amounts of host would
> fit into a single /64" would avoid that, and still fulfill the
> stated necessity of having many many many addresses per hosts.

Am I right that smth like "the prefix MUST be at least /96 but SHOULD
be /64" would make you less unhappy about the proposal?


-- 
SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email