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

[Brian Candler <[e-mail]>]

On 19/09/2024 17:11, Jeremy Duncan wrote:
> That’s a disingenuous argument. It’s like saying we need to care for 
> the amount of sunlight we receive because it’s going to run out… in 
> like 2-3 billion years…

It's being squeezed from all directions.

A /64 prefix is needed for each layer 2 domain (switched network). Those 
only scale reliably up to a few hundred devices; more than that and you 
need a router with multiple prefixes. Hence the need for at least a /56 
for end users.

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.

At the other side, larger ISPs are being allocated /16's, of which there 
are only 8192 in total available, giving a land-grab and a clear path to 
burnout before much of the world is even using IPv6 in anger.

All this because someone thought it would be a great idea to use MAC 
addresses to assign host addresses autonomously, without realising at 
the time what the privacy implications were. If they had, and we kept 
DHCPv6, we could give each end user a /96, and they'd still have more 
usable addresses than the whole IPv4 Internet. But yes, that ship has 
sailed.