← Back to context

Comment by SV_BubbleTime

4 days ago

>The point of IPv6 was to make the addresses so long they are easy to manage.

lol, there is no doubt that had a massive opposite effect. To the point of nearly killing it in terms of willingness to adopt.

I know that on my hosted server, I never bothered to set it up, because I didn't know how to properly configure or sub-net it. I know it's skill issue, but really feels significantly more complicated and even harder to understand than NAT even.

Not to mention, at home, most of the ads I do see (PiHole) are IPv6 addresses.

  • No network is "smaller" than /64. All end-networks are /64.

    Split subnets at four bit chunks.

    Allocated networks, like to a home or small office, should be /56 or /60.

    Then you have to think about link-local addresses and privacy addresses, and how to hand out IPv6 and configure DNS: SLAAC vs. DHCPv6 or some combination.

    I have a rough draft of a beginner document but it's not ready. :)

    • (Pedantically) Maximum prefix length of /64 is only required if you want/need SLAAC. If you're assigning static addresses or using DHCPv6 for assignment you can go as small as you want. It's not weird to see /127 for tunnel subnets, for example.

      2 replies →

How many /24s does your organisation have? With IPv6, one block is almost always sufficient.

  • It's mental that my fairly techy-orientated but otherwise pretty standard UK ISP provides me with a /48 as default.

    So I have 1.2 million million million million IPv6 addresses available.

    That ought to be enough, eh?

    • Of course, we could hand all 8 billion people on the planet a thousand /48’s each and still have trillions and trillions to spare.

      1 reply →