On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 07:33:10PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote: > On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 19:09 +0200, Simon Oosthoek wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 06:23:52PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > > > > > Except for the fact that one will most likely get a /48, there really is > > > not much of a difference in IPv4 versus IPv6. > > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, assuming we're 15 years in the future, I'm connecting > > my *networkbox* to an ISP and I do neighbourdiscovery, would I get a /48 > > from my ISP (assuming it has some way of verifying my relation with them)? > > With current policy you should. But there is a movement of thought > towards /56's becoming the standard.
hmm, what's the reasoning behind the change? Is it just stingyness? 256 subnets sounds like a lot, but if you plan to do a bit of hierarchy underneath that, you're in trouble with only 8 bits... > > or do I get a link local address, using which I can use some (which?) > > protocol to get my own (do I need a fixed one, yes I think so) /48 prefix? > > DHCPv6 with Prefix Delegation is what you are thinking about. > http://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng/html/presentations/march2002/DHCP-PD.pdf tnx, I'll check it out. But I think neighbour discovery is more natural somehow. > Though it is probably easier for the ISP to just point the /48 to a > fixed IP address on the uplink. Which is basically what SixXS does. But that doesn't really fit into the spirit of autoconfiguration. Cheers Simon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
