Re: I-D Action:draft--remi-despres--ipv6-rapid-deployment--00.txt

[Rémi Després <remi.despres@free.fr>]

Alexandru Petrescu a écrit :
> Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote:
...     :
> > draft--remi-despres--ipv6-rapid-deployment--00.txt Pages           :
> > 19 Date            : 2008-02-08
>
> Hello Remi and thank you for this draft.  I understand the intent is to
> have it discussed at IETF.  Is the v6ops WG the right venue for this
> discussion?
I believe this would be a good choice, but there may be considerations I 
don't know about which WGs discuss what.

>  From the perspective of the end user, I have a small question on the
> decision made by this deployment to deliver a /64 prefix to the end
> user.  With only a /64 users can not subnet their networks in house, and
> use stateless address autoconfiguration at the same time;  or, some
> users already have IPv4 subnets in-house.
>
> Is there a possibility to have for example a /56 delivered with 6rd
> method to end-user?
>
> (I'm asking this in light of the existing 6to4 method which allows a
>  adsl-box to deliver a /48 to end user; it appears more advantageous).
Section 3.2 of the draft discusses this issue.

/64 is clearly not ideal, but is guaranteed to be possible for ISPs that 
get only /32 from their RIR's.
Free was in this case when they made the first deployment of 6rd.

I just learned that they have now a shorter prefix.
They will be able to support several subnets per customer site.

Regards.

Rémi