[167166] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AT&T UVERSE Native IPv6, a HOWTO
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ricky Beam)
Mon Dec 2 21:35:44 2013
To: "NANOG List" <nanog@nanog.org>, "Leo Bicknell" <bicknell@ufp.org>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 21:35:28 -0500
From: "Ricky Beam" <jfbeam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <A8304B7B-1F54-4251-887B-06C108BA0CAE@ufp.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 20:56:13 -0500, Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org> wrote:
> - A /56 is horribly wrong and the world will end if we don't fix it NOW.
I'm reminded of the Comcast trial deployments. Wasn't their conclusion
(with a collective thumbs up from the networking world) to go with /56?
Yet, even they are handing out little old /60's.
> I would love to know what number of home users need 256 subnets. The
> good news is that folks doing DHCP-PD will be able to report on how many
> people request all 256 networks available, and are thus "out". In fact
> they can make a histogram from 1 to 256 networks per household, and show
> us how many request each number of subnets.
It doesn't work that way. Routers aren't asking for individual prefixes
('tho I suppose it's possible.) They ask for a /60 or /56, and then assign
the space as necessary. Thus, the ISP has no idea how many /64's are
actually being used.
