On 1 Oct 2012, at 13:59, RJ Atkinson <rja.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Consumer oriented providers handing out /64s >> to home nets is also bad. > > Agreed (s/consumer-oriented/any/). > > HomeNet WG ought to be VERY clear about this. > > HomeNet WG ALSO ought NOT "enable" or "encourage" > such behaviour by encouraging ANY scenarios > where SLAAC can't work properly.
There is clear consensus in this thread that homenet must support SLAAC and DHCPv6, and thus the architecture text should reinforce the comments that Ran has made. The residential deployments I am aware of in Europe all support at least /60 and up to /48. The most common is probably /56. We should not add complexity to homenet scenarios and break SLAAC to account for ISPs that might currently only offer a /64. There have been recent discussions elsewhere I believe on limitations of prefix delegation in certain types of mobile networks where only a /64 is offered currently, but those one would hope are temporary until DHCPv6-PD is supported there. Curtis can of course take proposals to 6man for discussion, but the architecture text here would not include those. Tim _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
