Owen, Currently I research on IPv6 provisioning systems and I need to decide whether the ability to use longer then /64 prefixes should be supported in them or not. If we restrict user to using /64 per network we need to have convincing reasons for this. Best practice and common sense stand for using /64 but this may be not sufficient for some people.
Dmitry Cherkasov 2011/11/28 Owen DeLong <[email protected]>: > You can probably do it, but, what do you gain by doing so? > > Owen > > On Nov 28, 2011, at 3:37 AM, Dmitry Cherkasov wrote: > >> Hello everybody, >> >> It is commonly agreed that /64 is maximal length for LANs because if >> we use longer prefix we introduce conflict with stateless address >> autoconfiguration (SLAAC) based on EUI-64 spec. But SLAAC is not used >> in DOCSIS networks. So there seems to be no objections to use smaller >> networks per cable interfaces of CMTS. I was not able to find any >> recommendations anywhere including Cable Labs specs for using >> prefixes not greater then /64 in DOCSIS networks. Some tech from ISP >> assumed that DHCPv6 server may generate interface ID part of IPv6 >> address similarly to EUI-64 so MAC address of the device can easily be >> obtained from its IPv6 address, but this does not seem like convincing >> argument. What do you think? >> >> >> Dmitry Cherkasov >
