Re: [v6ops] RFC 7084 on Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers

[Victor Kuarsingh <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Wuyts Carl <[e-mail]>wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> A typical CPE has 4 eth ports and wifi, all joined together as … the LAN
> intf, hence *1 interface* it is.  You do not hand out different prefixes
> to wired and wireless.  In fact, you can of course, but this would lead to
> routed traffic
>

Carl,

In your case above, I am not sure if the Eth ports you are referring to are
separate logical interfaces which are just bridged together or if they are
just switch ports that connect back to a single logical interface.
 Notwithstanding this, could you not consider all logical interfaces
(regardless if they are bridged day-1) as separate for the purposes of
asking for IPv6 PD space?

Lets assume that you have 4 eth ports, and standard WiFi interface and a
Guest WiFi.  This sounds like 6x [potential] interfaces, of which you may
only be using 1-2 for now [say LAN/WiFi is one, and Guest WiFi is two).  If
you ask for IPv6 PD space for all of the potential interfaces, rounded up
to the nearest nibble, you would grab a ::/60.

So in the beginning, you only configure 2 ::/64s for the interfaces you
fire up.  If you expand this and/or break out the function later, then you
use more (out of the ::/60).  If you only got a ::/62 or ::/64 from the
operator, then you log an error (right)?  If you get a ::/60 or ::/56 you
are ok (right)?

regards,

Victor K





>
>
>
>
> Regs
>
> Carl
>
>
>
> *From:* [e-mail] [mailto:
> [e-mail]]
> *Sent:* maandag 25 november 2013 15:27
> *To:* Wuyts Carl
> *Cc:* [e-mail]; Victor Kuarsingh
> *Subject:* Re: [v6ops] RFC 7084 on Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer
> Edge Routers
>
>
>
> <snip>
>
> > De : Wuyts Carl <[e-mail]>
> > Indeed, this will not be always known upfront.
>
> Carl, could you please give an example where a router doesn't know
> upfront the number of interfaces? Even if some of them could be
> off at some point (Wifi for example), the router usually knows
> the maximum number of local interfaces it can support.
>
> > Besides that, if you
> > purely want to look at all active interfaces, I believe you will be
> > (for residential market at least) push for a /64 for all
> > deployments, and I don’t believe this should be the goal.  After
> > all, many residential scenario’s at our customer base are a single
> > LAN from defs….
>
> I don't see why this would push /64 in the residential market.
> Most recent routers are expected to have a few interfaces (one
> for public wifi and another for the private lan for example) and
> therefore should hint for a /60 at least. If DHCPv6-PD is supported
> on the LAN side, a hint for /56 or /48 would be expected.
>
> And a hint is just that, a hint. The operator is free to hand out
> larger prefixes. Some operators will hand out a /64 in the
> absence of a hint because of a number of broken old implementations
> unable to carve out /64s out of larger prefixes. But beside these,
> /56 or larger is expected to become the standard for residential.
>
> As a data point, we hand out /56s by default as a cable
> operator and it works fairly well so far.
>
> /JF
>
>