On Jan 25, 2012, at 7:06 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote: > In a message written on Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 03:41:36PM +0100, Daniel > STICKNEY wrote: >> I've seen some documentation using <prefix>::1 with either a global >> prefix or link-local (fe80::1). Anyone use either of these in production >> and have negative or positive feedback? fe80::1 is seductive because it >> is short and the idea of having the same default gateway configured >> everywhere might be simple. At the same time using the same address all >> around the network seems to invite confusion or problems if two >> interfaces with the address ever ended up in the same broadcast domain. > > I don't think the industry has really found a best practice to > document yet. There are people trying different ideas. We find > the following convention allows us to keep things organized: > > <prefix>::1 - Default gateway > <prefix>::<last octect IPv4> - Statically assigned servers. > <prefix>:<eui-64> - Auto-configured host > > If you need them to co-exist, you can also do things like: > > <prefix>::<10240-20480> - DHCP Pool >
I'll note that 10240-20480 are not valid IPv6 suffixes and that you would need to represent that as <prefix>::<2800-5000> and would probably be better off to use something more like <prefix>::8:* as your DHCP pool. Owen
