>>>>> "Mark" == Mark Andrews <marka@xxxxxxx> writes:
Mark> In message
Mark> <992DF93E-1EFB-4D68-BDD7-D5C7BE02FC01@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Mark> Marshall Euba nks writes:
>> Hello;
>>
>> I think that people here would be interested in (and likely
>> concerned by) the ARIN 2010-9 proposal :
>>
>> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2010_9.html
>>
>> "On 15 July 2010 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) selected "IPv6
>> for 6rd" as a draft policy for adoption discussion on the PPML
>> and at the Public Policy Meeting in Atlanta in October.
>>
>> IPv6 for 6rd
>>
>> 6rd is an incremental method for Service Providers to deploy
>> IPv6, defined in the IETF Standards Track RFC 5969. 6rd has been
>> used successfully by a number of service providers to deploy IPv6
>> based on automatic IPv6 prefix delegation and tunneling over
>> existing IPv4 infrastructure. .... "
>>
>> What worries me (and others) is that to give end users an IPv6
>> /56 will generally require the assignments as short as /24s to
>> ISPs, due to the encapsulation of v4 addresses inside of v6
>> addresses :
>>
>> "The 6rd prefix is an RIR delegated IPv6 prefix. It must
>> encapsulate an IPv4 address and must be short enough so that a
>> /56 or /60 can be given to subscribers."
>>
>> 56 - 32 = a /24
Mark> Only a naive deployment of 6rd would do this.
Mark> If you deploy a 6rd prefix per IPv4 prefix you have allocated
Mark> and set appropriate IPv4 mask lengths in your DHCP replies to
I tried to raise this point in April at the ARIN meeting, but it wasn't
understood.
--
] He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life! | firewalls [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON |net architect[
] mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
Kyoto Plus: watch the video <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzx1ycLXQSE>
then sign the petition.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf