MAC addresses are not inside IPv6 addresses. That is just one of many possible ways to assign addresses. It's not a layer violation because it is completely optional.
On 5 November 2025 12:00:13 CET, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi Tim, >Multi-prefix, SP address delegation through the site, absence of NAT. Many >things. >Try to organize the primary and redundant connection to the SP (that is needed >for every business). > >The fact that every subnet is /64 is convenient. Just if has a payment >16/750=2% of the overall Internet capacity (750B is the average packet size). >The decision to violate OSI model and put MAC address inside IP address was >very questionable. >Eduard >-----Original Message----- >From: tim--- via NANOG <[email protected]> >Sent: Wednesday, November 5, 2025 12:59 >To: North American Network Operators Group <[email protected]> >Cc: [email protected] >Subject: RE: Artificial Juniper SRX limitations preventing IPv6 deployment >(and sales) > >On Wednesday, 5 November, 2025 06:26, "Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG" ><[email protected]> said: > >> There is no possibility of canceling the "subnet" concept for business. >> IPv6 subnet complexity is too much burden for businesses. > >I'm genuinely curious as to what you mean by this, Eduard. > >For me, one of the benefits of v6 at the design stage is that subnetting is >substantially *easier*. You don't have to worry about trying to carve up your >address space to get the right number of hosts in the right places, or trade >off bits of host-mask against bits of net-mask. > >All the subnets (and I mean LAN-type subnets here, obviously, not linknets) >are /64s, there will *always* be enough host addresses. Stop thinking about >host counts - it's irrelevant to the design. Simplification step 1. > >Now your design can purely think about how many subnets do I need, where do I >need them, what do I need them for. Even a basic home-level allocation of a >/56 lets you either have a flat '00' - 'ff' subnet space that you can assign a >function to each value of with loads to spare, or split out into a 'location' >nibble and a 'function' nibble. > >A business with a /48 can encode all kinds of useful information into the 16 >bits of 'subnet' available - business units, security zones, multiple levels >of geographical hierarchy. > >Or if you don't want to be that complex, you can still just work upwards from >2001:db8:1234:0::/64, 2001:db8:1234:1::/64, in the same way you did for >192.168.0.0/24, 192.168.1.0/24. > >There are challenges to adopting v6, sure, but I'm not clear how 'subnetting' >is one of them. > >Cheers, >Tim. > > >_______________________________________________ >NANOG mailing list >https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/BK74QBTIGRZ3CWKSGSJQFVBHFTL6LIXZ/ >_______________________________________________ >NANOG mailing list >https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/42TWWH735VPKBGQKYOYIFWHCFJUMPBFH/ _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/YJLEZYKLBXMRLGJ6FX7TKAB62ZJQWLSC/
