Mailing List Archive

Not sure whether I fully understand the question in all details, but:

1. on a LAN/WLAN (basically where NS/NA is required to work, = broadcast domain with MAC addresses), the use of a /64 prefix is recommended
2. Each host (being server or client) must have at least one global address within this prefix

If you have one server per LAN, then it is perfectly OK to use one /64 per server. If you think about that, currently you use a /32 for IPv4 address :-) You are currently wasting more space (4 billion times more)

-éric

From: Teerapatr Kittiratanachai <maillist.tk@gmail.com<mailto:maillist.tk@gmail.com>>
Date: mercredi 18 juin 2014 05:28
To: "ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de<mailto:ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de>" <ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de<mailto:ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de>>
Subject: IPv6 Assignment for Server

Dear IPv6-Ops,

I want the suggestion about the best practice for assign IPv6 Global Unicast address for server.
According to the IPv6 Subnet ID also be built in with IPv6 address, so if I assign the /64 mask to the server is it will be some of wasteful usage?
AFAIK, the /64 mask address can be brought to use for many other subnets. Is it more suitable to assign the /128 to the server, or end server that doesn't act as any other gateway.

Thank you in advance.

Regards,
Teerapatr Kittiratanachai (Te)

Thank you, I forgot to think about NS and NA.

One more question, If I got the /64 mask from ISP and implement as below.
Theoretically, is it work?

Normal Situation: work fine
IPv6 Internet ----- ISP (2001:db8:a:1::1/64) ----- (2001:db8:a:1::2/64) MyPC

My Implementation: is it possible?
IPv6 Internet ----- ISP (2001:db8:a:1::1/64) ----- (2001:db8:a:1:0::2/80)
MyRouter (2001:db8:a:1:a::1/80) ----- (L2 SWITCH) -----
(2001:db8:a:1:a::2/80) MyPCs

So from my router will also be IPv6 network with Global Unicast address.

--Te


On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke@cisco.com>
wrote:

> Not sure whether I fully understand the question in all details, but:
>
> 1. on a LAN/WLAN (basically where NS/NA is required to work, =
> broadcast domain with MAC addresses), the use of a /64 prefix is recommended
> 2. Each host (being server or client) must have at least one global
> address within this prefix
>
> If you have one server per LAN, then it is perfectly OK to use one /64 per
> server. If you think about that, currently you use a /32 for IPv4 address
> :-) You are currently wasting more space (4 billion times more)
>
> -éric
>
> From: Teerapatr Kittiratanachai <maillist.tk@gmail.com>
> Date: mercredi 18 juin 2014 05:28
> To: "ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de" <ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de>
> Subject: IPv6 Assignment for Server
>
> Dear IPv6-Ops,
>
> I want the suggestion about the best practice for assign IPv6 Global
> Unicast address for server.
> According to the IPv6 Subnet ID also be built in with IPv6 address, so if
> I assign the /64 mask to the server is it will be some of wasteful usage?
> AFAIK, the /64 mask address can be brought to use for many other
> subnets. Is it more suitable to assign the /128 to the server, or end
> server that doesn't act as any other gateway.
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
> Regards,
> Teerapatr Kittiratanachai (Te)
>
>

I wonder why you would like to do that rather than asking for a /60 at your ISP though :-)

You 2nd design MAY work but deviates from the IPv6 spec on LAN AFAIK. It will break SLAAC (so static configuration is required) and some routers and host implementations may (rightfully) complain. But you have decent chance that it works

-éric

From: Teerapatr Kittiratanachai <maillist.tk@gmail.com<mailto:maillist.tk@gmail.com>>
Date: mercredi 18 juin 2014 08:30
To: Eric Vyncke <evyncke@cisco.com<mailto:evyncke@cisco.com>>
Cc: "ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de<mailto:ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de>" <ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de<mailto:ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de>>
Subject: Re: IPv6 Assignment for Server

Thank you, I forgot to think about NS and NA.

One more question, If I got the /64 mask from ISP and implement as below. Theoretically, is it work?

Normal Situation: work fine
IPv6 Internet ----- ISP (2001:db8:a:1::1/64) ----- (2001:db8:a:1::2/64) MyPC

My Implementation: is it possible?
IPv6 Internet ----- ISP (2001:db8:a:1::1/64) ----- (2001:db8:a:1:0::2/80) MyRouter (2001:db8:a:1:a::1/80) ----- (L2 SWITCH) ----- (2001:db8:a:1:a::2/80) MyPCs

So from my router will also be IPv6 network with Global Unicast address.

--Te


On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke@cisco.com<mailto:evyncke@cisco.com>> wrote:
Not sure whether I fully understand the question in all details, but:

1. on a LAN/WLAN (basically where NS/NA is required to work, = broadcast domain with MAC addresses), the use of a /64 prefix is recommended
2. Each host (being server or client) must have at least one global address within this prefix

If you have one server per LAN, then it is perfectly OK to use one /64 per server. If you think about that, currently you use a /32 for IPv4 address :-) You are currently wasting more space (4 billion times more)

-éric

From: Teerapatr Kittiratanachai <maillist.tk@gmail.com<mailto:maillist.tk@gmail.com>>
Date: mercredi 18 juin 2014 05:28
To: "ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de<mailto:ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de>" <ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de<mailto:ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de>>
Subject: IPv6 Assignment for Server

Dear IPv6-Ops,

I want the suggestion about the best practice for assign IPv6 Global Unicast address for server.
According to the IPv6 Subnet ID also be built in with IPv6 address, so if I assign the /64 mask to the server is it will be some of wasteful usage?
AFAIK, the /64 mask address can be brought to use for many other subnets. Is it more suitable to assign the /128 to the server, or end server that doesn't act as any other gateway.

Thank you in advance.

Regards,
Teerapatr Kittiratanachai (Te)

Sorry for my mistake, I should write Tunnel Broker instead of ISP.
Due to the ISPs doesn't deploy the IPv6 yet, so I have to access via TB.
And some TB doesn't provide a lot of IPv6 address.

Anyway, Many thanks for your quick reply.

--Te

On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
<evyncke@cisco.com> wrote:
> I wonder why you would like to do that rather than asking for a /60 at your
> ISP though :-)
>
> You 2nd design MAY work but deviates from the IPv6 spec on LAN AFAIK. It
> will break SLAAC (so static configuration is required) and some routers and
> host implementations may (rightfully) complain. But you have decent chance
> that it works
>
> -éric
>
> From: Teerapatr Kittiratanachai <maillist.tk@gmail.com>
> Date: mercredi 18 juin 2014 08:30
> To: Eric Vyncke <evyncke@cisco.com>
> Cc: "ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de" <ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de>
> Subject: Re: IPv6 Assignment for Server
>
> Thank you, I forgot to think about NS and NA.
>
> One more question, If I got the /64 mask from ISP and implement as below.
> Theoretically, is it work?
>
> Normal Situation: work fine
> IPv6 Internet ----- ISP (2001:db8:a:1::1/64) ----- (2001:db8:a:1::2/64) MyPC
>
> My Implementation: is it possible?
> IPv6 Internet ----- ISP (2001:db8:a:1::1/64) ----- (2001:db8:a:1:0::2/80)
> MyRouter (2001:db8:a:1:a::1/80) ----- (L2 SWITCH) -----
> (2001:db8:a:1:a::2/80) MyPCs
>
> So from my router will also be IPv6 network with Global Unicast address.
>
> --Te
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke@cisco.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Not sure whether I fully understand the question in all details, but:
>>
>> on a LAN/WLAN (basically where NS/NA is required to work, = broadcast
>> domain with MAC addresses), the use of a /64 prefix is recommended
>> Each host (being server or client) must have at least one global address
>> within this prefix
>>
>> If you have one server per LAN, then it is perfectly OK to use one /64 per
>> server. If you think about that, currently you use a /32 for IPv4 address
>> :-) You are currently wasting more space (4 billion times more)
>>
>> -éric
>>
>> From: Teerapatr Kittiratanachai <maillist.tk@gmail.com>
>> Date: mercredi 18 juin 2014 05:28
>> To: "ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de" <ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de>
>> Subject: IPv6 Assignment for Server
>>
>> Dear IPv6-Ops,
>>
>> I want the suggestion about the best practice for assign IPv6 Global
>> Unicast address for server.
>> According to the IPv6 Subnet ID also be built in with IPv6 address, so if
>> I assign the /64 mask to the server is it will be some of wasteful usage?
>> AFAIK, the /64 mask address can be brought to use for many other subnets.
>> Is it more suitable to assign the /128 to the server, or end server that
>> doesn't act as any other gateway.
>>
>> Thank you in advance.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Teerapatr Kittiratanachai (Te)
>
>

Hi,

> Sorry for my mistake, I should write Tunnel Broker instead of ISP.
> Due to the ISPs doesn't deploy the IPv6 yet, so I have to access via TB.
> And some TB doesn't provide a lot of IPv6 address.

Every IPv6 tunnel broker I know gives you a /48, which is 65536 /64s. Can you please let me know which tunnel broker you are using? They are doing it wrong...

Cheers,
Sander

Dear Eric,

Great idea, thanks.


Dear Sander,

This is TB is just a government organization which was established to
study/develop in field of technology.
And TB is one of some services that still be in implement phase.

--Te

On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Sorry for my mistake, I should write Tunnel Broker instead of ISP.
>> Due to the ISPs doesn't deploy the IPv6 yet, so I have to access via TB.
>> And some TB doesn't provide a lot of IPv6 address.
>
> Every IPv6 tunnel broker I know gives you a /48, which is 65536 /64s. Can you please let me know which tunnel broker you are using? They are doing it wrong...
>
> Cheers,
> Sander
>

Hi,

> This is TB is just a government organization which was established to
> study/develop in field of technology.
> And TB is one of some services that still be in implement phase.

Ah, so there is still time to fix things :) One of the great things of IPv6 is that addresses are plentiful. Especially when doing studies and development this is important. We don't want to force people to learn IPv6 with unnecessary limitations, the users need to be able to make use of the main feature of IPv6.

I have worked with government entities before in cases like this. Feel free to give them my email address :) And I'm sure there are more people on this list that can assist!

Cheers,
Sander

"Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com> writes:

> If you have one server per LAN, then it is perfectly OK to use one /
> 64 per server. If you think about that, currently you use a /32 for
> IPv4 address :-) You are currently wasting more space (4 billion
> times more)

I think that depends on what kind of server we are talking about. Almost
any modern dedicated server you can rent today has enough CPU power and
RAM to run virtual server. So with one /64 per server you have to use
"dirty" tricks to assign IPv6 addresses to a VM. For my server I get a
/48 and assign a /64 to each VM.

It's always good to have more than one IP per server, this way you run
multiple Servers per IP (e.g. DNS or HTTP). This might get a little
dirty but sometimes it necessary. For internal Server I would go with a
/64 or maybe a /112. With a normal /48 or /32 assignment you should have
enough networks.

Jens
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Foelderichstr. 40 | 13595 Berlin, Germany | +49-151-18721264 |
| http://blog.quux.de | jabber: jenslink@jabber.quux.de | --------------- |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 09:46:14 AM Jens Link wrote:

> It's always good to have more than one IP per server,
> this way you run multiple Servers per IP (e.g. DNS or
> HTTP). This might get a little dirty but sometimes it
> necessary. For internal Server I would go with a /64 or
> maybe a /112. With a normal /48 or /32 assignment you
> should have enough networks.

We normally assign /112's in static scenarios.

Where we or customers needs SLAAC, we assign a /64.

Mark.

Hi Eric and list,

> I wonder why you would like to do that rather than asking for a /60 at
> your ISP though :-)

unfortunately there are ISPs and hosters who simply don't get it.

In some cases they haven't yet managed to get this idea out of their
minds that IP addresses are a scarce resource you should preserve, which
is bad but at least there's hope they'll learn.

In other cases this is simply them making money in a way they have
become rather comfortable with: By making their customers pay for a
resource that they themselves don't actually pay for. These ISPs will
slowly but continuously lose customers to competitors who have figured
out that they can give their end users a serious benefit without extra
cost---provided that there are such competitors. If you are stuck in
nowhereland and a single such ISP being your only "choice", then you're
pretty much out of options.


Cheers,

Benedikt

--
Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting
Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/

Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects

BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/

Dear Jens and Mark,

Is there any benefit to assign /112 mask ?

--Te

On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu> wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 09:46:14 AM Jens Link wrote:
>
>> It's always good to have more than one IP per server,
>> this way you run multiple Servers per IP (e.g. DNS or
>> HTTP). This might get a little dirty but sometimes it
>> necessary. For internal Server I would go with a /64 or
>> maybe a /112. With a normal /48 or /32 assignment you
>> should have enough networks.
>
> We normally assign /112's in static scenarios.
>
> Where we or customers needs SLAAC, we assign a /64.
>
> Mark.

On 18 Jun 2014, at 10:49, Teerapatr Kittiratanachai <maillist.tk@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Jens and Mark,
>
> Is there any benefit to assign /112 mask ?

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-why64-01

tim

>
> --Te
>
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 09:46:14 AM Jens Link wrote:
>>
>>> It's always good to have more than one IP per server,
>>> this way you run multiple Servers per IP (e.g. DNS or
>>> HTTP). This might get a little dirty but sometimes it
>>> necessary. For internal Server I would go with a /64 or
>>> maybe a /112. With a normal /48 or /32 assignment you
>>> should have enough networks.
>>
>> We normally assign /112's in static scenarios.
>>
>> Where we or customers needs SLAAC, we assign a /64.
>>
>> Mark.

On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:49:00 AM Teerapatr
Kittiratanachai wrote:

> Dear Jens and Mark,
>
> Is there any benefit to assign /112 mask ?

When it comes to IP addresses, personally, I differ from
most by being a little conservative, even with IPv6.

But technically, nothing I've seen so far, no. I've been
using /112's lengths since 2006.

Mark.