On Jul 14, 2012, at 2:04 PM, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
On Sat, 2012-07-14 at 09:18 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Jul 14, 2012, at 9:08 AM, Jérôme Nicolle wrote:
Le 13/07/12 16:38, -Hammer- a écrit :
In the past, with IPv4, we have used reserved or "non-routable"
I guess "non-routable IPv4" translates well to "non-routable IPv6", thus putting Link-Local addresses on top of the list.
Thought you may use th auto-configured addresses for that purpose, you also may set LLAs to your liking. I use fe80::zone_ID:interface_ID , and set such LLA to every gateways to make routing tables more legible, those ID beeing arbitrary 16bit values.
Given that zone_IDs in my environments consist of terms like:
fxp0 en0 eth0 ge-0/0/0.0 etc.
How, exactly, would you turn those into part of an IPv6 address?
Hi,
We use LLA to "virtualize" interconnection to our users: their network configuration is always static default via fe80::nnnn and we route their /56 prefix to fe80::xxxx:yyyy where xxxx:yyyy is unique per user - if our user want to do some routing of course. Since we don't have GUA interconnections we don't have to manage them inside our AS and we can move user stuff around without having them changing anything to their static configuration.
We give a /56 IPv6 per /32 IPv4 to our user which does /48 = /24 = 256 "IP", it's nice to have more than one /64 around for some uses.
Is there any "mass" hoster around that does provide by default a pefix larger than /64 and that does route it to the user? It's quite simple to do in IPv6 and we have the address space for it.
Sincerely,
Laurent
Why not just give each end-site a /48? An end-site with a /24 may only need a single or a few subnets while an end-site with a /32 may have a host of subnets behind their IPv4 NAT gateway. Making IPv6 topological assumptions for your end-users based on their IPv4 presentation makes little sense to me and is likely a disservice to your end users. Owen