[157636] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Masataka Ohta)
Thu Nov 1 08:22:30 2012
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 21:20:29 +0900
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CALgc3C7ngGpkRNYaCgN_ACY28uPFbM=KRnACsW0Jg=YsLuQHhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Eugeniu Patrascu wrote:
> You can say it's a IPv4 thinking model, but it's easier to remember
> that if the fileserver it's at 192.168.10.10 then it's IPv6
> counterpart address would be 2001:abcd::192:168:10:10 (each subnet
> being a /64)
That is a clever idea except that it can not always follow
modified EUI-64 format aof rfc4291.
We should better introduce partially decimal format for
IPv6 addresses or, better, avoid IPv6 entirely.
Masataka Ohta
>
>
>
>>
>> Another option would be to do both. Assign a fixed address and also
>> let it chose EUI-64. However, I see that leading to confusion. Not
>> sure what good it would do.
>>
>> Is there anything like a standard, best practice for this (yet)?
>> What are other people doing and their reasons? Anyone have operational
>> experience with what works and what does not (and the "what does
>> not" is probably really of more interest)?
>
> Letting the host choose it's own IP can be very tricky and has
> operational hurdles along the way as it's not that easy to copy
> configurations across devices during upgrades and maintenance swap
> outs.
>
>
>
