[address-policy-wg] Re: IPv6 allocations for 6RD

On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 03:20:42PM +0100, Gert Doering wrote:
>  - what 6rd implementations are there "out in the market" today?
>    (both provider and CPE side)

I know of (and can are not under NDA) _and_ got my hands on:

BR:  Cisco ASR1k
CPE: AVM FritzBox

>  - what approach do they take?  "always use 32 bits for mapping" or 
>    the configurable approach from the i-d quoted above (IPv4MaskLen > 0)?

Cisco IOS (on ASR1k): fully flexible configurable
AVM: currently fixed /63 (as they may use routed mode between LAN and
WiFi, thus two /64s needed) with full 32bit IPv4 mapping, in future
flexible on v4-mapping width and delegated subnet size down to /63 or
even /64.

Ideally, IFF we would use 6RD, we'd like to have a single /24 block to
support full 32bit IPv4 address mapping while providing a /56 to
customers.

Fiddling around with all your different IPv4 PA aggregates, splitting
6RD domains and trying to find halfway suitable space for those in your
"normal" IPv6 allocation to support 6RD is.... well, a significant cost
for operational point of view, making 6RD actually not that "rapid" and
cheap to deploy. The present RIPE policies do add non-negliable indirect
cost to deploy 6RD. At least if your plan is to go proper dual-stack
"everywhere" over time and you want to use a nice-and-shiny addressing
scheme for your allocation, not disturbed by large 6RD blocks. See other
folks' recent comments here.

Best regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr at cluenet.de -- dr at IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0