Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course

Sat Jul 24 21:58:29 UTC 2010

On Jul 24, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Brandon Butterworth wrote:

>> The RFC provides for two address ranges in fc00::/7, one for random
>> prefixes (fc00::/8), the other reserved for later management (fd00::/8).
> 
> Later, in some undefined way. A PI lacking enterprise considering
> doing v6 this way either waits or decides the available space will do
> as someone will fix the managment later. Sixxs demonstrated that some
> will see a need
> 
Or they forego the kludge and go with PA v6 realizing that they can
do overlapping PA v6 transitions with relative ease when they switch
providers. Of course during that time of overlap, they are technically
multi-homed, so, there are other options as well.

> With low take up of v6 it's early to know what they will see important
> 
Yep. Enterprises are really the least of the concerns right now as well.
We have about a year, maybe less to try and get public-facing stuff
dual-stacked. We have lots of time yet to address the enterprise
issues.

>> The more important it is to you that your allocation be unique, the
>> more careful you will be to choose a truly random one.
> 
> So a way to have really unique is reasonable.
> 
I think the simplest approach is simply to multihome and get a PI
assignment if you don't want to live with PA. That's the cleanest
approach too with the added benefit that you can load-balance
and gain some redundancy and other optimizations in the process.

>> The chance that any
>> random prefix will conflict with any chosen prefix is very, very small.
>> The chance that two conflicting prefixes would belong to entities that
>> will ever actually interact is even smaller.
> 
> People still play the lotteries.
> 
My favorite definition of the term Lottery is:

Lottery (n): A tax on people who are bad at math.

Owen