Re: [v6ops] MAC table shortage in IPv6 networks caused by multiple IPv6 prefixes/addresses//FW: New Version Notification for draft-liu-v6ops-running-multiple-prefixes-01.txt

Apple believes the coexistence of slaac and dhcp6 are a problem and close defects as "3rd party problem won't fix" when raised with them. 

Jared Mauch

> On Jul 11, 2014, at 5:40 AM, "Liubing (Leo)" <leo.liubing@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Andrew,
> 
>>> Now there are some enterprise/campus networks under real use or
>>> considering using L2 networks. Some are aiming at better user isolation
>>> through VLANs (some even consider QinQ mechanism); while some are
>>> aiming less configuration/management than the traditional L3 networks.
>>> So there would be thousands of hosts aggregated to the core switch
>>> (normally there are two core switches stacked together, but only share one
>> cache space).
>>> As IPv6 is beginning real use, for example, some of the campus networks
>>> are already dual-stack, and the majority of the hosts are Win 7, we
>>> once observed in one campus that DHCPv6/SLAAC are both enabled, each
>>> Win 7 host had 4 IPv6 addr (SLAAC+DHCPv6+Privacy+link-local)+1 IPv4 addr.
>> 
>> If the majority of the hosts are Win 7, and are under the control of the
>> administrator, this looks more like a misconfiguration rather than anything
>> else: clear the "A" bit on the prefix, and they'll half the address usage - down
>> to just link-local and DHCPv6-based.
> 
> [Bing] I can hardly say SLAAC and DHCPv6 co-existing is a misconfiguration, but I agree DHCPv6-only deployment can partly relieve the problem.
> However, even DHCPv6-only would have 2 IPv6 addr+1 IPv4 addr, which would cause approximately 5~8 times cache space than IPv4-only.
> 
> Best regards,
> Bing
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops