Re: [address-policy-wg] 2005-08 New Policy Proposal

[Jørgen Hovland <]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gert Doering" gert@localhost


> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 at 12:51:38AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 08:10:15PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > >> > There is no option to give "10 addresses" to a user - period.
> > >> What about transfer networks?  How do you handle those?
> > >
> > > The RFC says "all networks get a /64" (unless running unnumbered).
> >
> > I'm not concerned with the network, but with the IP addresses which
> > are given to routers.  Or are you expected to run autoconfiguration
> > on transfer networks?
> Indeed, this is an interesting issue, and each ISP will find his own
> way to handle this.
>
> Currently, we tend to use the "<prefix>::1" on our side of all links,
> and the customer can use whatever he likes - which is usually ::2.
>
> Autoconfiguration for routers works, but is not overly helpful, as the
> other router on the network needs to know the router's IP to route
> packets in its direction... - unless you run OSPFv3 (or ISIS), in
> which case IPv6 autoconfig (or "just use link-locals") would actually
> work fine.
Hi,
From the input I received I got the impression that you have to assign a /64 
no matter what. So it means you use 2 IPs (or 10 in my case) and toss the 
other 2 - 2^64 away and then continue with next customer and assign a new 
/64 and so on. I hope I see the point of all this address waste in a few 
years. In the mean time I'll just do it(tm).

Cheers,

Joergen Hovland