Chad, Why would you want a specific range? To reduce the (small) risk from scanning attacks, a unique pseudo-random choice would be better, IMHO, as long as it conforms to RFC 4291 and 5453.
BTW this question might fit better on the v6ops list or even on [email protected] where there are lots of operational people. Regards Brian Carpenter On 2010-12-18 09:02, Chad Kissinger wrote: > Hello, > > We are deploying IPV6 to our customers and are carefully planning the > architecture of how we are going to deploy prefixes, assign customer gateways > and how we are going to number our own infrastructure in a meaningful way. > Although I think Stateless Autoconfiguration will be used quite a deal for > nodes that are "clients", most of my customers have large server farms and > our infrastructure, of course, has many routers. I would think it would be > preferable to be able to either use a DHCPV6 pool or to use manual > configuration so that the resulting Interface Identifier is either bounded > within a known range (tighter than 64 bits wide) or is a specific predictable > address (like ::ABC/128 for all customer Gateways, etc.) or to have patterns > like :AAAA: within an Identifier for all Edge Routers for easier "on sight" > identification by SysAdmins... > > However, after many days of reading, I cannot find any place that > specifically details the method one would use to identify suitable ranges to > choose from for a manually configured Interface ID or a pool of such IDs. Is > it as simple as setting the 71st and 72nd bit and avoiding Anycast addresses? > > RFC 5453 seems to be written to address this, but seems to have all the > relevant detail missing... > > What am I missing? Isn't this a concern for everyone? > > [cid:[email protected]] > chad kissinger | founder-vp | onramp access, llc > p: 512.322.9200 | f: 512.476.2878 | www.onr.com<http://www.onr.com/> > your internet operations | built | deployed | managed > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > [email protected] > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
