On Oct 9, 2011 11:16 PM, "Mikael Abrahamsson" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, 9 Oct 2011, Shishio Tsuchiya wrote: > >> 2^64 host address space would be too enough for homenet. > > > I would just like to comment on this even though you retracted your question. > > As an ISP, I do not want to participate in a home with hundreds or thousands of active IPv6 addresses that I need to keep state for. Most likely, when we have central equipment participating in a home network, we'll implement a limit on number of neighbours it'll allow on the subnet. Doing ND/NS a lot takes resources. > > If customer wants to use more IPv6 addresses, we'll require them to get a home router and PD address space to it to distribute the ND/NS load. >
Agreed. But I think it is worth noting that nd-proxy is practical in mobile networks where each subscriber gets a unique /64. Mobile network attachment has popped up a few times in homenet discussions. Cb > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
