IPv6 Confusion

TJ trejrco at gmail.com
Tue Feb 17 17:35:38 UTC 2009

>How does IPv6 addressing work?

Short version:
2000::/3			The currently active global unicast pool
RIRx::/12			IANA (by default) assigns /12s to RIRs
RIRx:ISPx::/32		RIRs (by default) assign /32s to ISPs
RIRx:ISPx:ORGx::/48		ISPs (by default) assign /48s to enterprises
(/56s to homes)
RIRx:ISPx:ORGx:VLAN::/64	Enterprises 'subnet' their allocation into
/64s	(debate over [/126 | /127] to P2P links)

>I know it's been hashed and rehashed but several orgs I am associated with
>about to ask for their allocations from ARIN and we are all realizing we
>really know how the network / subnet structure trickles down from the edge
>the host.  We really don't have a firm grasp of all of this as there seems
>be multiple options regarding how many addresses should be assigned to a
>if the MAC address should be included in the address or if that is just for
>auto-configuration purposes or what the heck the deal is.  There are a lot
>clear statements out there and a lot that are clear as mud.  Unfortunately,
>even when trying to analyze which RFC superseded another.  Can I just
subnet it

Use the IETF/RFC web interface, clearly shows what RFCs where deprecated by,
or deprecate/update, a given doc:
	e.g. - http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2461
		... has an obsoleted by, updated by, and obsoletes ...

>all like IPv4 but with room to grow or is each host really going to need
>own /84 or something?  I can't see why hosts would need any more addresses
>today but maybe I'm missing something because a lot of addressing models
>allow for a huge number of unique addresses per host.
>My buddy and I are about to go to Barnes and Noble, not having and luck
>standard internet media but then we realized...  how will we know if any of
>that is really what we are looking for either?

Depends what you are looking for, and possibly your HW vendor of choice.


More information about the NANOG mailing list