--On Friday, February 01, 2002 01:04:48 PM +0100 Philip Homburg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In your letter dated Thu, 31 Jan 2002 20:55:16 +0100 you wrote:
>> --On Thursday, January 31, 2002 03:09:08 PM +0700 Robert Elz
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I probably wouldn't either, though we don't want to totally forget
>>> allocation efficiency - the way we make sure that IPv6 never runs
>>> out is to always make sure we justify every allocation (which
>>> doesn't mean organisations need to justify their need for a /48 -
>>
>>> but I'd certainly be making any organisation asking for a 2nd one
>>> (in the same aggregatable block,
>>
>> If this will happen, which organisation would this be? Compared
>> with current IPv4 /48 with the 16 bits for SLA is similar to a
>> IPv4 Class A network.
>
> What happens if an organization has a modem bank for dail-in? Do
> you hand out /64s or something larger? Suppose that you want to
> give each 'modem user' a fixed prefix, how soon do you run out of
> prefixes?
Where is the problem?
Today they got *one* *dynamic* IPv4 address and have to be happy with
it. Connection of additional internal hosts requires masquerading,
causing perhaps problems and had (without dedicated port forwarding)
no capability to direct traffic from outside to inside.
In IPv6 future, they will get one /64 prefix and can connect a lot of
toasters, VCRs, TVs, battery chargers, light switches and so on. All
devices get a *global* IPv6 address.
And in case of no IPv6 firewalling, all this devices can be connected
directly from outside.
--> normally a big advantage
not mention any potential security issues in network-connected
toasters here now ;-)
People have only to think that they do no longer need to take care
about Layer 3 routing and addresses in their home networks, they only
need a Layer 2 switch and the "IPv6 access device".
Your described scenario only cause a problem if someone really wants
to Layer 3 route in his home network - but how many really want to do
this or need this?
Conclusion: people have to think about network redesigning from
dedicated small IPv4 network islands to bigger full switched IPv6
networks.
Note: broadcast traffic is reduced/eliminated in IPv6 because of
Layer 3 multicast mechanism, which should be also mapped into Layer 2
multicast addresses.
Peter
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
