Waste will kill ipv6 too
morrowc.lists at gmail.com
Thu Dec 21 23:17:58 CST 2017
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org> wrote:
> > On 22 Dec 2017, at 3:48 am, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists at gmail.com>
> > 2) For the transition technology discussion I believe it centered around
> > attempting to get a /48 to each 'site' (home/customer) and doing ds-lite
> > the transition technology in use.
> > (map the customer to not a /128 in the ds-lite, but a /48)
> I think you mean 6rd. DS-Lite doesn’t use any extra IPv6 addresses.
yes, sure, it was some time ago that the discussion happened :(
> 6rd can be poorly done by embedding the entire IPv4 address in the IPv6
> address. Doing that does waste space.
> 6rd deployment should not require much more IPv6 /48’s than a native IPv6
> deployment would. That does require properly configuring your DHCPv4
> servers with DIFFERENT 6rd DHCPv4 Option values on a per IPv4 DHCP pool
> basis which I’m sure every ISP here is capable of doing as there is nothing
> really new here to do. You have all carved up IPv4 assignments into IPv4
> pools. This is no different. You carve up a IPv6 assignments into similar
> sized pools of /48’s then set the 6rd DHCPv4 Option to the appropriate
> values for that IPv4 to IPv6 pool mapping. Add the mapping to the BRs and
> you are done.
> Mark Andrews, ISC
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka at isc.org
More information about the NANOG