On 14/10/2009, at 3:49 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Nathan Ward <na...@daork.net> said:
On 14/10/2009, at 2:14 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
What about web-hosting type servers? Right now, I've got a group of
servers in a common IPv4 subnet (maybe a /26), with a /24 or two
routed
to each server for hosted sites. What is the IPv6 equivalent? I
can
see a /64 for the common subnet, but what to route for aliased IPs
for
web hosts? It is kind of academic right now, since our hosting
control
panel software doesn't handle IPv6, but I certainly won't be putting
2^64 sites on a single server. Use a /112 here again as well?
Use a
/64 per server because I can?
Why route them to the servers? I would just put up a /64 for the web
servers and bind addresses to your ethernet interface out of that /64
as they are used by each site.
I guess you might want to route them to the servers to save ND
entries
or something on your router?
In the past, we saw issues with thousands of ARP entries (it has
been a
while and I don't remember what issues now though). Moving a block
from
one server to another didn't require clearing an ARP cache (and
triggering a couple of thousand new ARP requests).
Yeah I figured as much.
Also, it is an extra layer of misconfiguration-protection: if the IPs
are routed, accidentally assigning the wrong IP on the wrong server
didn't actually break any existing sites (and yes, that is a lesson
from
experience).
I guess. The advantage of doing it with a single /64 for all of them
is that you can move individual sites to other servers without much
drama. That might not be useful for everyone of course.
--
Nathan Ward
