In message <505e83f6.3030...@joelhalpern.com>
"Joel M. Halpern" writes:
 
> Since you invited flames...
>  
> The argument on /64 as the longest prefix is not that it is magically 
> unnatural.
> Rather, it is that there are a number of current and evolving protocols 
> that depend upon that /64.  The obvious example is that SLAAC does not 
> work if subnets are longer than /64.
>  
> The rules in this regard are written into approved RFCs.  If homenet 
> wants to change that, it really needs to go to 6man with a strong case. 
>   (for point-to-point inter-router links this was recently relaxed.
>  
> At the same time, andy operator who insists on giving homes a /64 is 
> being inappropriately restrictive.  Homenet should say that, rather than 
> trying to change the IPv6 architecture.
>  
> Yours,
> Joel

Joel,

I don't consider your email a flame at all.  Thanks for responding.

SLAAC (which I am not at a fan of) won't work but DHCPv6 will so IMHO
no loss.  CGA also won't work but then again I've also never been a
fan of security half measures.  Yes anti-spoofing without prior
exchange of a key is nice, but no reasonable authorization could be
based on CGA without also exchanging some sort of key or cert and at
that point the CGA as a public key is redundant.

If SLAAC and CGA are the only things that break *and* providers do
hand out prefixes that are too small, then /64 prefixes will have to
be subdivided.

So a question for you is what else if anything will break?

I also understand that you are suggesting that this be taken to 6man.
That is a good suggestion.

Curtis


> On 9/22/2012 11:30 PM, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
> >   12.  This is sure to be controversial.  I pointed out that using
> >        subnets longer than /64 is OK as long as they are not leaked
> >        into global routing.  Please read the text and changes before
> >        exploding on this topic.  It may be necessary to subnet a /64 if
> >        that is all a provider will give you and you need subnets.  It
> >        does work and it is no more unnatural than subnetting a class-A
> >        network would be in 1990.  It means using DHCPv6 and not using
> >        RA prefixes for GUA (otherwise SLAAC implementations would
> >        likely try to use the whole bottom 64).
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to