Hi Curtis, SLAAC not working is a major problem.
Don On 9/23/12 4:09 PM, "Curtis Villamizar" <[email protected]> wrote: > >In message <[email protected]> >"Joel M. Halpern" writes: > >> Since you invited flames... >> >> The argument on /64 as the longest prefix is not that it is magically >> unnatural. >> Rather, it is that there are a number of current and evolving protocols >> that depend upon that /64. The obvious example is that SLAAC does not >> work if subnets are longer than /64. >> >> The rules in this regard are written into approved RFCs. If homenet >> wants to change that, it really needs to go to 6man with a strong case. >> (for point-to-point inter-router links this was recently relaxed. >> >> At the same time, andy operator who insists on giving homes a /64 is >> being inappropriately restrictive. Homenet should say that, rather >>than >> trying to change the IPv6 architecture. >> >> Yours, >> Joel > >Joel, > >I don't consider your email a flame at all. Thanks for responding. > >SLAAC (which I am not at a fan of) won't work but DHCPv6 will so IMHO >no loss. CGA also won't work but then again I've also never been a >fan of security half measures. Yes anti-spoofing without prior >exchange of a key is nice, but no reasonable authorization could be >based on CGA without also exchanging some sort of key or cert and at >that point the CGA as a public key is redundant. > >If SLAAC and CGA are the only things that break *and* providers do >hand out prefixes that are too small, then /64 prefixes will have to >be subdivided. > >So a question for you is what else if anything will break? > >I also understand that you are suggesting that this be taken to 6man. >That is a good suggestion. > >Curtis > > >> On 9/22/2012 11:30 PM, Curtis Villamizar wrote: >> > 12. This is sure to be controversial. I pointed out that using >> > subnets longer than /64 is OK as long as they are not leaked >> > into global routing. Please read the text and changes before >> > exploding on this topic. It may be necessary to subnet a /64 >>if >> > that is all a provider will give you and you need subnets. It >> > does work and it is no more unnatural than subnetting a class-A >> > network would be in 1990. It means using DHCPv6 and not using >> > RA prefixes for GUA (otherwise SLAAC implementations would >> > likely try to use the whole bottom 64). >_______________________________________________ >homenet mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
