Which is pretty much what was said to mike, when this came up in the WG 2 IETFs ago. Overloading parts of the allocation space under your /32 makes a complete mockery of the process model which justified the /32 based on /56 or /48 consumption plans, and while the H/D ratio is a somewhat rei-fied number, this kind of scheme will alter consumption of the address space massively.
That some large ISPs and network operators *want* to overload bits in the address to have meaning? Sure. I can believe that. That vendors, knowing this, *want* to encode logic into sold routers, devices, to exploit this? Sure. I can believe that. is it a good architecture? No. I cannot currently believe that. -george On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 4:47 PM, Lorenzo Colitti <lore...@google.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Tim Chown <t...@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: > >> I agree. That said, an ISP, enterprise or group of organisations can >> follow whatever semantics they wish within their own borders. >> > > As long as the RIRs are willing to give them enough address space to do so. > > If an ISP requested an IPv6 /10 from ARIN because they wanted to give > every customer a /48 and wanted to geocode the customer's subscriber ID > into the /48, then ARIN would do well to say, "no, sorry, that doesn't make > sense". > > Lest someone not realize this, the draft should clearly state that > embedding N bits of semantics into IPv6 addresses causes the network to use > 2^N times the address space that it normally would. > > IMO I think it should also state that although it is an IETF RFC, this > model is not necessarily a recommended model, and that RIRs are not obliged > to accept this type of address allocation as a justification for obtaining > larger address blocks than they would normally be able to obtain. > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6...@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > >
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
