Curtis, I would not call what you describe "ground rules." They are a
valid and useful operating premise, used by many residential service
providers.
Other service providers prefrer other architectures and state
maintenance, in exchange for other capabilities.
While I would not want to insist that all edge home routers must be
bridges, I find it unfortunate that folks seem to be insisting that they
must be routers.
Yours,
Joel M. Halpern
On 10/10/2011 5:24 PM, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
In message<[email protected]>
Mikael Abrahamsson writes:
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.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: [email protected]
+1
violent agreement, etc
IMO the ground rules are: The ISP provides one prefix. The homenet
subdivides it only if there are multiple subnets. The ISP doesn't see
the longer prefixes that exist only within the homenet.
Curtis
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
