Re: IPV6 planning

2016-03-05 Thread Hugo Slabbert
On Sat 2016-Mar-05 23:30:10 +0100, Baldur Norddahl wrote: On 5 March 2016 at 22:54, wrote: And note that there isn't any problem with a machine getting an IPv6 address via SLAAC *and* getting another one via DHCPv6 - my laptop is doing that as I type (plus a privacy address or two as well)

Re: IPV6 planning

2016-03-05 Thread Karl Auer
On Sun, 2016-03-06 at 01:57 +0200, Saku Ytti wrote: > Technically speaking there is no reason not to support SLAAC on > arbitrary size networks. I believe Cisco happily will autogenerate > address for smaller subnets. To support SLAAC with prefix lengths other than 64 you would have to break numer

Re: IPV6 planning

2016-03-05 Thread Saku Ytti
On 6 March 2016 at 00:59, Karl Auer wrote: > Other thing with SLAAC is that you get 64-bit subnets and only 64-bit > subnets. This should not be any kind of problem with a flat /48, but if > you will have more complicated subnetting you should keep an eye on it. Technically speaking there is no r

Re: IPV6 planning

2016-03-05 Thread Karl Auer
On Sat, 2016-03-05 at 16:19 -0500, Laurent Dumont wrote: > We are currently considering deploying IPv6 for a Lan event in April. > We are assigned a /48 which we then split into smaller subnets for > each player vlan. That said, what remains to be decided is how we are > going to assign the IPv6.

Re: IPV6 planning

2016-03-05 Thread Baldur Norddahl
On 5 March 2016 at 22:54, wrote: > And note that there isn't any problem with a machine getting an IPv6 > address > via SLAAC *and* getting another one via DHCPv6 - my laptop is doing that > as I > type (plus a privacy address or two as well). > > That is what our CPEs (from Inteno) do. Every com

Re: IPV6 planning

2016-03-05 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Sat, 05 Mar 2016 23:46:59 +0200, Mark Tinka said: > If you want IPv6 DNS resolvers, DHCPv6 is a good option, which means a > hybrid of DHCPv6 and SLAAC is reasonable. And note that there isn't any problem with a machine getting an IPv6 address via SLAAC *and* getting another one via DHCPv6 - m

Re: IPV6 planning

2016-03-05 Thread Mark Tinka
On 5/Mar/16 23:19, Laurent Dumont wrote: > Hiya, > > We are currently considering deploying IPv6 for a Lan event in April. > We are assigned a /48 which we then split into smaller subnets for > each player vlan. That said, what remains to be decided is how we are > going to assign the IPv6. Basi

IPV6 planning

2016-03-05 Thread Laurent Dumont
Hiya, We are currently considering deploying IPv6 for a Lan event in April. We are assigned a /48 which we then split into smaller subnets for each player vlan. That said, what remains to be decided is how we are going to assign the IPv6. Basically, it seems that are two ways, one SLAAC where