[158792] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Why do some providers require IPv6 /64 PA space to have public
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Tue Dec 11 03:46:41 2012
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <50C6B817.7030304@dougbarton.us>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:43:14 -0800
To: Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>
Cc: "Constantine A. Murenin" <mureninc@gmail.com>,
"nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Dec 10, 2012, at 8:35 PM, Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> wrote:
> On 12/10/2012 03:14 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>=20
>> On Dec 10, 2012, at 2:04 PM, Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>
>> wrote:
>>=20
>>> On 12/10/2012 01:27 PM, Schiller, Heather A wrote:
>>>> I think most folks would agree that, IPv4 /32 :: IPv6 /128 as
>>>> IPv4 /29 :: IPv6 /64
>>>=20
>>> Quite the opposite in fact. In IPv6 a /64 is roughly equivalent to
>>> a /32 in IPv4. As in, it's the smallest possible assignment that
>>> will allow an end-user host to function under normal
>>> circumstances.
>>=20
>> No, you could be assigned a /128 and have it function for a single
>> host.
>=20
> You saw how I very carefully phrased my statement to try to avoid this =
kind of ratholing, right? :)
>=20
>> However, let's not start doing that as it's pretty brain-dead
>> and the reality is that hardly anyone has a single host any more.
>>=20
>> Heather has the corollaries correct.
>=20
> You're entitled to your opinion of course, just don't be surprised =
when people disagree with you.
>=20
Regardless of how you phrase it, the functional IPv6 equivalent of an =
IPv4 /32 is an IPv6 /128.
You don't configure a /64 on a loopback interface in a router, for =
example, you configure a /128.
>>> SWIP or rwhois for a /64 seems excessive to me, FWIW.
>>=20
>> I'm not sure I disagree, but, I certainly don't feel strongly enough
>> about it to submit a policy proposal. I will say that you are far
>> more likely to get this changed by submitting a policy proposal than
>> you are by complaining to NANOG about it.
>=20
> I certainly don't care enough about it to do that, I was just voicing =
an opinion.
>=20
> Doug (personally I'd be happy just to have native IPv6 available)
I'm loving mine.
Owen
