On Thursday 14 January 2010 09:26:46 Ole Troan wrote: > it is a "MAY" and a "hint". > a typical scenario would for example be that an SP gave a /56 regardless of > the hint. I hope /48 is more typical... ;-) > does the working group feel a need to specify the case where the CE router > doesn't get a large enough prefix delegated? or are we happy leaving that > up to implementations. alternatives are at least "various degrees of > bailing out", "NAT66", "proxy ND"... I personally feel this should be specified. Or at the very least some acceptable options should be listed. Bailing out: does this mean fe80::/10 only? Or fc00::/7 ? Note: fe80::/10 is a major headache for users - I don't think I can explain to most of my friends how to enter http://[fe80::1122:33ff:fe44:5566%1] into their browsers and why it is different for every CPE they use. NAT66: first off, the draft expired. Second it does not solve the problem: it is not a cone NAT - it translates a /48 into another /48 (it might be adapted to translate /n into /n, but not into a cone NAT). What do you mean with "proxy ND"? For most users a web proxy might be a temporary solution to deal with a no delegation situation. Question aside from this: why request only a prefix that is barely big enough for a /64 for each interface? There could be dozens of routers behind that CPE. Why not encourage to request a /48 everytime? We aren't running out of them any time soon. Konrad
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.