On Feb 22, 2013, at 06:16 , Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> wrote: > > If the ISP with the longest prefix is alive first, then the routers > pick subnet-id parts that fit into that. If that ISP has provided > enough subnets, then even when another ISP comes along, the "xx23" > part might remain stable for a long time.
This problem is precisely why I campaigned bitterly and vigorously against the adoption and V6OPS and later the publication of RFC 6177. When there was still a consensus that subscribers should always get a /48 prefix, it was reasonable to expect that a randomly chosen 16-bit subnet identifier would be unlikely to collide with another subnet in most automatically numbered routing domains. We were also in a position to expect that when a subscriber adds a new prefix from the same or a different provider, that all the subnet identifiers in use on one prefix could be mapped 1:1 into the new prefix. Now we have RFC 6177, which explodes all of that, for basically no sensible reason that I can see, and we are all the poorer for it. Well done, V6OPS, well done. -- james woodyatt <j...@apple.com> core os networking _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
