[ppml] Those pesky EUI-64's causing a shortage of IPv6 space (Was: [address-policy-wg] Those pesky ULAs again)

[Jeroen Massar]

Paul Vixie wrote:
>> I agree that requireing the use of 64 bits for interface identifiers is a
>> monumental waste of address space. Is there a proposal of any type to change
>> the requirement to use EUI64 interface identifiers with globally routable PI
>> address space?
> 
> no.  but as someone else here has said, "the ietf is whoever shows up at the
> meetings or joins the mailing lists or writes internet drafts."  so anyone
> here who wanted to propose a /112 DHCPv6 alternative to EUI64 can just do it.

[not directed at Paul actually, but already *d* the other message ;) ]

But why would anybody want  to 'ban' EUI-64 configured addresses?

Your own network is exactly that: your own network.

There is *NO* requirement at all to use EUI-64. The only
semi-requirement that is there for EUI-64 is that the link-local
addresses use it. Well, I do sincerely hope that everybody can live
with that part.

Everything which is on your local network you can specify yourself.
Don't want to use RA's? Then don't, your choice. Want to use DHCPv6,
then please do! Want to use /112's? Then do it. It is your network,
nobody can and will stop you from doing so.

As long as when the packet leaves your site it is compliant to the
IPv6 standard and has a proper IPv6 source address in your prefix,
everything will work fine. How you handle the routing at your end, how
you have subnetted everything together, see if anybody else on this
planet cares ;)


The only real, change I see coming in the IPv6 specs are the /48
boundary. For companies this is fine, it is most likely a fit all for
90%+ of the companies out there and having a single fit is great.
But when you have 20m, home, subscribers a /48 will never be filled
and a /56 (still 256 /64's of space, which you can still split up to
/112's with DHCP or whatever size you might find comfy etc) will be a
more adequate size, that is if we are going to consider that it is a
waste of space.

Then again, on the other side, there are 536870912 (500 million) /32's
in 2000::/3 alone. Which will really not easily fit in any routing
table of any sort (but please prove me wrong ;)

Oh and when 2000::/3 is full, we can always pick one of the other 7
/3's which are not being used yet and 'try again'. Enough for even my
kids their kids and their to play with.

Greets,
 Jeroen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 311 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20070604/25b62016/attachment.sig>