--===============0336015060==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1156924025-1284499280=:48531"
--0-1156924025-1284499280=:48531
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Excellent question.
We keep spinning around the question of "what if we groom a customer to a
different edge router?" DHCP assignments come from DHCP pools based on the
source address of the relay router (i.e., edge router). Even if the home
gateway knows to request a new prefix when its link comes up on a new router,
the devices in the home don't know that their prefix has changed.
Maybe the home gateway should expect to send a DHCP Reconfigure if it acquires a
new prefix after a link state change? Assuming the link actually bounces in a
groom, that is.
How does your edge router know the next hop of the DHCP prefix? Snoop the DHCP
packet? I think we should resurrect RAAN, but since it expired I'm not sure
there's support. Just MHO, of course.
For those playing along at home, this is as hard as the IPv6 questions get. And
this probably isn't a question an enterprise network has to handle.
Lee
________________________________
From: Randy Carpenter <rcarpen@network1.net>To: arin-discuss@arin.netSent: Tue, September 14, 2010 12:19:57 PM
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Trying to Understand IPV6
What are everyones' thoughts regarding dynamic versus static assignments for
residential users?
Our current plan is to use DHCPv6 with prefix delegation to auto-assign the WAN
and LAN prefixes. In this scenario, we could easily change assignments without
anyone having to touch any equipment.
The big question is will that wreak havoc with customers' internal network if
the addresses ever change?
Static assignments for 10,000's of customers does not sound very appealing.
Any other considerations?
thanks,
-Randy
----- Original Message -----
> We've already received our first /32 allocation, I was thinking that
> this would be the last allocation we would ever need. Since we're a
> cable TV provider we are somewhat at the mercy of DOCSIS and CableLabs
> as to how v6 addresses will be distributed as well as the companies
> that
> create the provisioning software. I guess I need to start that
> discussion first with the provisioning software developers. Last I
> heard they were still about 6 months out (their estimate) from having
> anything to play with. Compared to our cable plant, the metro ethernet
> customers sound easy... A /64 on the WAN and a /48 on the LAN unless
> I'm
> missing something.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen@delong.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 11:25 AM
> To: Tom Bourgeois
> Cc: arin-discuss@arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Trying to Understand IPV6
>
> Tom,
>
> If you know you have 115k customers, you should request more than a
> /32
> to begin with. Probably something approaching a 30 or a /29 under
> current policy. I am soon going to be drafting a policy proposal that
> supports the notion of rounding up to nibble boundaries in order to
> provide better guidance to ISPs on right-sizing their requests and
> also
> to provide better human factors engineering in the address space
> overall.
>
> Owen
>
> On Sep 14, 2010, at 7:23 AM, Tom Bourgeois wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: arin-discuss-bounces@arin.net
> > [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces@arin.net] On Behalf Of Ron Cleven
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 9:49 AM
> > To: arin-discuss@arin.net
> > Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Trying to Understand IPV6
> >
> >
> > I was with you right with you (assign /48 to every customer, no
> > exceptions) up until you came up with the big-isp exception (assign
> > /56 to private residences).
> >
> > Why would Comcast (using your example) customers get "only" a /56?
> >
> > Is there something wrong with the math (are big-isp's going to run
> > out
>
> > of /48's)?
> >
> > If it is ok for Comcast customers to get /56's, why isn't it ok for
> > all other private residences to get /56's (what are the /56
> > customers
> > giving up)?
> >
> > As usual, I am horribly confused.
> >
> > Ditto. We currently have around 115k residential data subs in
> > addition to a few thousand business customers. Compared to the
> > Comcasts, AT&Ts, and Time Warner's of the world we're definitely on
> > the small side but if I give everyone a /48 then I guess I need to
> > go
> > back and get a couple more /32s soon. I guess I don't see the huge
> > problem with aggregation on our local plant.
> >
> > michael.dillon@bt.com wrote:
_______________________________________________
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contact info@arin.net if you experience any issues.
--0-1156924025-1284499280=:48531
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:12pt"><div>Excellent question.<br>We keep spinning around the question of "what if we groom a customer to a different edge router?" DHCP assignments come from DHCP pools based on the source address of the relay router (i.e., edge router). Even if the home gateway knows to request a new prefix when its link comes up on a new router, the devices in the home don't know that their prefix has changed.<br><br>Maybe the home gateway should expect to send a DHCP Reconfigure if it acquires a new prefix after a link state change? Assuming the link actually bounces in a groom, that is.<br><br>How does your edge router know the next hop of the DHCP prefix? Snoop the DHCP packet? I think we should resurrect <a
href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-agentopt-delegate-04">RAAN</a>, but since it expired I'm not sure there's support. Just MHO, of course.<br><br><br>For those playing along at home, this is as hard as the IPv6 questions get. And this probably isn't a question an enterprise network has to handle.<br><br>Lee<br><br><br></div><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><br><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><font size="2" face="Tahoma"><hr size="1"><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b> Randy Carpenter <rcarpen@network1.net><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> arin-discuss@arin.net<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Tue, September 14, 2010 12:19:57 PM<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [arin-discuss] Trying to Understand IPV6<br></font><br>
<br>What are everyones' thoughts regarding dynamic versus static assignments for residential users?<br><br>Our current plan is to use DHCPv6 with prefix delegation to auto-assign the WAN and LAN prefixes. In this scenario, we could easily change assignments without anyone having to touch any equipment.<br><br>The big question is will that wreak havoc with customers' internal network if the addresses ever change?<br><br>Static assignments for 10,000's of customers does not sound very appealing.<br><br>Any other considerations?<br><br>thanks,<br>-Randy<br><br>----- Original Message -----<br>> We've already received our first /32 allocation, I was thinking that<br>> this would be the last allocation we would ever need. Since we're a<br>> cable TV provider we are somewhat at the mercy of DOCSIS and CableLabs<br>> as to how v6 addresses will be distributed as well as the companies<br>> that<br>> create the provisioning software. I guess I
need to start that<br>> discussion first with the provisioning software developers. Last I<br>> heard they were still about 6 months out (their estimate) from having<br>> anything to play with. Compared to our cable plant, the metro ethernet<br>> customers sound easy... A /64 on the WAN and a /48 on the LAN unless<br>> I'm<br>> missing something.<br>> <br>> -----Original Message-----<br>> From: Owen DeLong [mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:owen@delong.com" href="mailto:owen@delong.com">owen@delong.com</a>]<br>> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 11:25 AM<br>> To: Tom Bourgeois<br>> Cc: <a ymailto="mailto:arin-discuss@arin.net" href="mailto:arin-discuss@arin.net">arin-discuss@arin.net</a><br>> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Trying to Understand IPV6<br>> <br>> Tom,<br>> <br>> If you know you have 115k customers, you should request more than a<br>> /32<br>> to begin with. Probably something approaching a 30 or
a /29 under<br>> current policy. I am soon going to be drafting a policy proposal that<br>> supports the notion of rounding up to nibble boundaries in order to<br>> provide better guidance to ISPs on right-sizing their requests and<br>> also<br>> to provide better human factors engineering in the address space<br>> overall.<br>> <br>> Owen<br>> <br>> On Sep 14, 2010, at 7:23 AM, Tom Bourgeois wrote:<br>> <br>> ><br>> ><br>> > ________________________________<br>> ><br>> > From: <a ymailto="mailto:arin-discuss-bounces@arin.net" href="mailto:arin-discuss-bounces@arin.net">arin-discuss-bounces@arin.net</a><br>> > [mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:arin-discuss-bounces@arin.net" href="mailto:arin-discuss-bounces@arin.net">arin-discuss-bounces@arin.net</a>] On Behalf Of Ron Cleven<br>> > Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 9:49 AM<br>> > To: <a ymailto="mailto:arin-discuss@arin.net"
href="mailto:arin-discuss@arin.net">arin-discuss@arin.net</a><br>> > Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Trying to Understand IPV6<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > I was with you right with you (assign /48 to every customer, no<br>> > exceptions) up until you came up with the big-isp exception (assign<br>> > /56 to private residences).<br>> ><br>> > Why would Comcast (using your example) customers get "only" a /56?<br>> ><br>> > Is there something wrong with the math (are big-isp's going to run<br>> > out<br>> <br>> > of /48's)?<br>> ><br>> > If it is ok for Comcast customers to get /56's, why isn't it ok for<br>> > all other private residences to get /56's (what are the /56<br>> > customers<br>> > giving up)?<br>> ><br>> > As usual, I am horribly confused.<br>> ><br>> > Ditto. We currently have around 115k residential data subs in<br>> >
addition to a few thousand business customers. Compared to the<br>> > Comcasts, AT&Ts, and Time Warner's of the world we're definitely on<br>> > the small side but if I give everyone a /48 then I guess I need to<br>> > go<br>> > back and get a couple more /32s soon. I guess I don't see the huge<br>> > problem with aggregation on our local plant.<br>> ><br>> > <a ymailto="mailto:michael.dillon@bt.com" href="mailto:michael.dillon@bt.com">michael.dillon@bt.com</a> wrote:<br>_______________________________________________<br>ARIN-Discuss<br>You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<br>the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (<a ymailto="mailto:ARIN-discuss@arin.net" href="mailto:ARIN-discuss@arin.net">ARIN-discuss@arin.net</a>).<br>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<br><span><a target="_blank"
href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss</a></span><br>Please contact <a ymailto="mailto:info@arin.net" href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br></div></div>
</div><br>
</body></html>
--0-1156924025-1284499280=:48531--
--===============0336015060==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contact info@arin.net if you experience any issues.
--===============0336015060==--
Originally sent: Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:21:20 -0700 (PDT)
Re-queued by ESC7NET: Tue Sep 21 02:04:53 2010