[183581] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Subscriber Access Deployments
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Wed Sep 9 06:53:07 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at>
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 12:51:58 +0200
In-Reply-To: <34692.1441744883@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Cc: Josh Moore <jmoore@atcnetworks.net>, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 8/Sep/15 22:41, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
>
>
> Oh, it doesn't *need* that many. You can go ahead and run your IPv6
subnets
> with a /96 or /112. Just remember that will piss off any hardware that
tries
> to do SLAAC. or a few other things.... :)
Well, if you use DHCPv6 IA_NA for the CPE WAN link, you can go down as
low as /128 per CPE device.
And then you use DHCP-PD for the onward assignment to the customer's
network.
Mark.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=B6fv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
