This approach was discouraged ipv6-ops listserv and one person pointed out that this violates an RFC: http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/2011-January/004677.html
Frank -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Victor Lyapunov Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 10:30 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [c-nsp] DHCP_PD usage for PPPoE Access Hello I have been testing some scenarios for IPv6 over broadband connections. The setup is a the most common one, the CPE gets -One ::/128 WAN ipv6 address using autonegotiaton. -A signle ::/56 LAN subnet for the user networks, through DHCP-PD (further subneted into /64 subnets for the various VLANs in the CPE) For this setup the NAS server is configured with a local ipv6 pool for WAN address assignment (autonegotiation) ipv6 local pool PPPOE 2001:100::/64 128 shared And a second pool used by the DHCP_PD ipv6 local pool LAN 2001:200::/48 56 In this way I have to maintain two different pools (one for CPEs WAN and one LAN addressing). A possible alternative that is discussed, is having the NAS allocate just the DHCP_PD ::/56 prefix to the CPE (as far as global addresses are concerned). And then configure the CPE to use the first of the resulting 256 ::/64 subnets for the WAN and the rest for the LANs. What is your experience, is the second alternative worth pursuing? Is there a common practice? Thanx for the input _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
