On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 12:47 PM, William Waites <[email protected]> wrote: > I've started writing here: > > https://pad.okfn.org/p/bcop-small-ipv6 > > Today, a couple of paragraphs about the intended audience before > getting into the meat of it.
It's a good start, but could you rewrite the part on "Address Allocation" ".... ipv6 not so different (only forget scarcity and use /64 by default and /56 or /48 if requested" I guess the allocation should be replaced with assignment toward end-users as a starter, then the next thing is the size you mention. Giving a /64 toward end-users will break many things, it will break homenet design (IETF homenet) and not to forget it's against the original intention when we relaxed the /48-for-everyone. Probably biggest clue for this is the HD-Ratio in http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-589 "In IPv6, "utilisation" is only measured in terms of the bits to the left of the efficiency measurement unit (/56)." Replace it with something along this "by default give everyone a /56, on request a /48". It is really that simple. some background on the /56 size. Sometime before 2005 a discussion started if /48 for everyone was too strict, not so much about wasteful but more than anyone ever would need. After some back and forth RIPE changed it in 2005, the earliest document I found was 2005-08. I've tried to fill a /48 on just my own stuff in many ways but it's almost impossible, a /56 on the other hand is possible to fill but it's hard. I did tunnels between several machines I own/control, vpn so I could inside my own network, each service and LAN that got a /64 etc. It is documented quite a few more places than just in RIPE documents. The original intention was that we thought /56 was the right and recommended (lower cases) sizes for regular end-users. /48 was the right size for bigger end-users like enterprises. Over the years through rewrites it seems to have been relaxes so it's not that easy to see that it was ment as a recommanded (lower cases) on assigments sizes. I guess the reason for it being lower case is that none can dictate how an ISP/or anyone should do their assigment of the address space, only thing was to make an recommendation. Here is a few documents that mention the /56 http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2005-08 http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-why64/?include_text=1 http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2005-08 http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-02 http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-589 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-narten-iana-rir-ipv6-considerations-00 -- Roger Jorgensen | ROJO9-RIPE [email protected] | - IPv6 is The Key! http://www.jorgensen.no | [email protected]
