[172490] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Ars Technica on IPv4 exhaustion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ricky Beam)
Thu Jun 19 16:57:50 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 16:57:40 -0400
From: "Ricky Beam" <jfbeam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1406191220240.17699@whammy.cluebyfour.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 12:21:12 -0400, Justin M. Streiner
<streiner@cluebyfour.org> wrote:
> How much IPv6 space would you propose an ISP provisions for each of its
> residential users?
A single /64 would, currently, be sufficient for 99% of households. The
link can be /128, /127, /64, whatever -- between ISP and CPE doesn't
matter to the customer. (maybe to their equipment) As this is being done
via DHCPv6-PD, it's a simple matter to ask for more space (typically /60)
in the rare cases the customer needs it. And in a decade when 16 LANs
isn't enough, allow /56's.
If it weren't for stupid SLAAC and it's nanolathed-in-diamond prefix===64
requirement, we could start out - day one - with more reasonable sizes.
Give everyone their own entire internet (::/96) to carve up as they wish.
It's not like anything even on the whiteboard today can handle a fraction
of that many devices in a single LAN.
