Tumblelog by Soup.io
Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

RFC 6177 has obsoleted its predecessor, updating or negating the three core recommendations as such:

1) It is no longer recommended that /128s be given out. While there may be some cases where assigning only a single address may be justified, a site, by definition, implies multiple subnets and multiple devices.

2) RFC 3177 specifically recommended using prefix lengths of /48, /64, and /128. Specifying a small number of fixed boundaries has raised concerns that implementations and operational practices might become "hard-coded" to recognize only those fixed boundaries (i.e., a return to "classful addressing"). The actual intention has always been that there be no hard-coded boundaries within addresses, and that Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) continues to apply to all bits of the routing prefixes.

3) This document moves away from the previous recommendation that a single default assignment size (e.g., a /48) makes sense for all end sites in the general case. End sites come in different shapes and sizes, and a one-size-fits-all approach is not necessary or appropriate.

In summary, the IETF has decided that deciding on prefix sizes for end sites is "an issue for the operational community." However, section five of the RFC does offer some guidance well wroth reading for those writing internal IPv6 address allocation policies.

IETF Lifts /48 Recommendation for End Sites - Packet Life

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl