> As far as why "site" has been abused to mean "administrative > domain", that comes from the IETF and RIRs being very > ISP-centric, as I said; a single downstream connection > denotes a single "site" regardless of how complex the > internal network behind it is or how many other locations it > serves. Or maybe it doesn't, depending on who's talking; > that's the problem.
I have always believed that the definition of a site in IPv6 is tied in with the idea that if every "site" has a /48 subnet assignment, then migration to a different provider only requires changing the prefix bits. The existing subnet topology hidden inside the /48 remains unchanged. By this definition an apartment or family home is a site. An office in big buidling is a site. A company building is a site. A campus-like collection of buildings is a site. Here is where definitions need to be precise and relate back to original goals. A single company may own several buildings and those buildings may be next to each other. I believe that each separate building should be considered to be a site. A campus is more than a collection of buildings because it is difficult, or impossible to separate one building from the group. On a campus there is centralization of utilities, even going so far as to connect all buildings by tunnel systems and heat all buildings via hot water from a central steam plant. Why is the definition of a site so important? Because a "site" is mobile. It can change providers and it can change ownership indpendent of neighboring sites. By that definition, airplanes, trucks and train carriages are also sites. They are just mobile more frequently than sites in buildings. I think it is important for the IETF to have clear documentation of the interconnectedness of "sites", /48 prefixes, mobility, and freedom of choice. At least one RIR now allows ISPs to assign shorter /56 prefixes to consumer sites, i.e. family homes and apartments. This is not necessarily a bad thing since it is rare for a family home to turn into an office without significant infrastructure change. But if there is to be a special size for the family home, it too should be the same worldwide. And it too should be documented by the IETF. --Michael Dillon -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
