Re: Question on DHCPv6 address assignment

2014-02-03 Thread Mark Boolootian
Infoblox uses the ISC DHCP code. I'm thin on details. > 1) What's the pattern with which addresses are generated/assigned? Are > they sequential (fc00::1, fc00::2, etc.)? Random? Something else? The manual says "When the server grants IPv6 leases, it uses an algorithm based on the DUID of the c

Re: Question about IPAM tools for v6

2014-02-03 Thread Sam Wilson
On 3 Feb 2014, at 11:58, Tim Chown wrote: > > On 3 Feb 2014, at 11:32, Sam Wilson wrote: > >> >> On 3 Feb 2014, at 11:17, Nick Hilliard wrote: >> >>> On 03/02/2014 11:11, Sam Wilson wrote: Let me de-lurk and make the obvious point that using standard Ethernet addressing would lim

Re: Question about IPAM tools for v6

2014-02-03 Thread Tim Chown
On 3 Feb 2014, at 11:32, Sam Wilson wrote: > > On 3 Feb 2014, at 11:17, Nick Hilliard wrote: > >> On 03/02/2014 11:11, Sam Wilson wrote: >>> Let me de-lurk and make the obvious point that using standard Ethernet >>> addressing would limit the number of nodes on a single link to 2^47, and >>>

Re: Question about IPAM tools for v6

2014-02-03 Thread Sam Wilson
On 3 Feb 2014, at 11:17, Nick Hilliard wrote: > On 03/02/2014 11:11, Sam Wilson wrote: >> Let me de-lurk and make the obvious point that using standard Ethernet >> addressing would limit the number of nodes on a single link to 2^47, and >> that would require every unicast address assigned to eve

Re: Question on DHCPv6 address assignment

2014-02-03 Thread Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
Fernando Wrt to the Cisco DHCPv6 server (CNR): 1) sequential or random per configuration (can send multiple IA_NA/IA_TA if there are multiple prefixes configured for this link) 2) while client can send a 'hint' to re-use previous addresses, the server can do the same thing, we called this 'affinit

Re: Question about IPAM tools for v6

2014-02-03 Thread Nick Hilliard
On 03/02/2014 11:11, Sam Wilson wrote: > Let me de-lurk and make the obvious point that using standard Ethernet > addressing would limit the number of nodes on a single link to 2^47, and > that would require every unicast address assigned to every possible > vendor. Using just the Locally Administ

Re: Question about IPAM tools for v6

2014-02-03 Thread Sam Wilson
On 31 Jan 2014, at 15:26, Alexandru Petrescu wrote: > Speaking of scalability - is there any link layer (e.g. Ethernet) that > supports 2^64 nodes in the same link? Any deployed such link? I doubt so. > > I suppose the largest number of nodes in a single link may reach somewhere in > the tho