[v6ops] Re: [E] New Version Notification for draft-mishra-v6ops-variable-iids-problem-statement-01.txt

[Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]>]

It is absolutely not the intent to require that every host get a /64 in
networks that don't have enough address space. That would be hugely
limiting. That's the reason we are defining the P flag in the PIO - so
networks can choose whether hosts will attempt PD or not. Networks have
always been able to choose to use SLAAC, or DHCPv6 IA_NA, or both. Now they
can choose to support PD-per-device as well.

On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 6:07 AM Jeremy Duncan <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Gert-
>
> Yes, I understand it's 256 hosts when you are assigning a /64 per node.
> But as the specific draft references:
>
> "   *  In small networks (e.g., home networks), where the number of
>       clients is not too high, the number of available prefixes becomes
>       a limiting factor.  If every phone or laptop in a home network
>       were to request a unique prefix suitable for SLAAC, the home
>       network might run out of prefixes, if the prefix allocated to the
>       CPE by its ISP is too small (e.g., if an ISP delegates a /60, it
>       would only be able to delegate 15 /64 prefixes to clients).  So
>       while the enterprise network administrator might want all phones
>       in the network to request a prefix, it would be highly undesirable
>       for the same phone to request a prefix when connecting to a home
>       network."
>
> However, I will say I agree that this one single use case could have
> potential issues if these 2 things are true:
> 1. DHCPv6-PD is enforced for all nodes
> 2. the network's allocation is only a /56 or /60
>
> However, if that were the case it would only affect a specific situation.
> And is this even the intent behind this draft from the authors Lorenzo,
> Jen, and Xiao?
>
>
> -Jeremy
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gert Doering <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2024 4:57 PM
> To: Jeremy Duncan <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Brian Candler <[e-mail]>; Gert Doering <[e-mail]>; Mark
> Smith <[e-mail]>; Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo=
> [e-mail]>; IPv6 Operations <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [v6ops] Re: [E] New Version Notification for
> draft-mishra-v6ops-variable-iids-problem-statement-01.txt
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 05:21:35PM +0000, Jeremy Duncan wrote:
> > " If you are also required to give a /64 to every device that wants to
> use DHCP-PD, and your ISP only gives you a /56, then that would limit you to
> > <256 such devices in your network."
> > **that's wrong. It's 256 /64 subnets
>
> Please read up on
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcp-pd-per-device/
>
> .. that's the point here.
>
> Gert Doering
>         -- NetMaster
> --
> have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
>
> SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Ingo
> Lalla,
>                                            Karin Schuler, Sebastian Cler
> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
> D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
> Tel: [phone] <+49%2089%2032356444>         USt-IdNr.:
> DE813185279
>