[arin-ppml] IPv6 Non-connected networks
mcr at sandelman.ca
Mon Feb 22 14:11:24 EST 2010
>>>>> "michael" == michael dillon <michael.dillon at bt.com> writes:
>> It seems like we're back to ULA again. It seems that we all
>> want the same thing, "unroutable" address space for internal
>> use only. There are any number of reasons to have RFC
>> 1918'ish space in v6 and the real difference now is that,
>> given the size of the v6 address space, we don't have to
>> allocate blocks to be used by all providers. Instead, we're
>> in a position where we *can* give everyone their own block.
>> We could even do the old multicast thing and auto-assign a
>> ULA (or whatever it's called) block to each ARIN allocation.
>> In thinking about it, I do agree that having a defined block
>> for filtering purposes is preferred.
michael> GLOP addressing uses the 16-bit ASN to specify a /24 block
michael> of multicast addresses, if I remember correctly. So, if we
michael> used the 32-bit ASN to specify a /48 block of private use
michael> addresses, we could probably fit it in.
michael> I don't believe that this has ever been proposed before
michael> so it may be worthwhile writing a draft to see what happens.
michael> And why not also include the "assigned ULA" addresses in
michael> the draft as well. If people like one idea better than the
michael> other, then simplify the draft.
michael> So we would have
michael> 16 bits defined prefix for private use IPv6 addresses
michael> 32 bits ASN number
michael> 16 bits subnetting space
michael> 64 bits IIDs
michael> Total 128 bits of IPv6 address.
So this is basically a gift of a /48 to every owner of an ASN.
To most of them, they don't need an extra /48. A few could use them,
but as John Santos says, most of the Enterprise types who need an
RFC1918 or swamp-class-C equivalent, they don't have an ASN already.
michael> And given that there are some private-use ASNs defined, that
michael> gives everyone the option to use those private-use addresses
michael> whether or not they have an assigned ASN. That is essentially
michael> the same as RFC 1918 addresses in IPv4.
The combination of the private-USE ASN with this proposal makes this
into EXACTLY rfc1918, aka "SITE-LOCAL" addresses.
This is a bad idea --- make it easy to get address space, and people
will use unique address space for unconnected things. Your description
of COINs was very relevant.
So far I haven't seen a proposal (other than 103) which really addresses
this need. It seems like the best answer is an RFC to be written to
tell IANA to delegate FC00::/16 to the RIRs.
] He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life! | firewalls [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON |net architect[
] mcr at sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
Kyoto Plus: watch the video <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzx1ycLXQSE>
then sign the petition.
More information about the ARIN-PPML