We are using CNR for DNS and DHCPv6 and would like to handout v6 network prefixes of /119 or /120 to Windows 2003 (SP2) clients. Question is will the MS 2003 clients accept a network prefix of other than /64? (Sorry I understand this is NOT an M$ chat site) Thanks for ANY Help.
Typically, the host is going to expect a /64 prefix. However, there is nothing to keep you from configuring a /119 or /120 *range* in the CNR while you still advertise a /64 to the hosts.
So to describe further, I'm not sure why would you care to hand-out v6 network prefixes of /119 or /120. CNR's range for allocation can be much smaller (larger prefix length) than the prefix advertised to the client.
So, advertise /64 to clients. Use /119 or /120 if you want in CNR.
It's transparent to your hosts this way...they expect and get a /64 prefix, and you get the benefit of a /119 or /120 range in the CNR (totally transparent to the hosts).
First thanks for the reply. It appears there are NOT many folks interested in v6 - yet.
Here is what I understand
Mask.....# of Host in network
So if I wanted a network to match my current class "C" of 254 host, I would use a /120.
When I present the Win2003 host with a network prefix of ANYTHING other than a /64 the host ignores the prefix and does not accept the prefix. The host just has a link local address and cannot get off the local net, no gateway, no DNS, No NTP etc. I understand the host wants a /64 so it will EUI it's MAC address to have a 128 bit unique address and that is fine. I was hoping for another way to present the host with a prefix/host address via CNR and leave the EUIed MAC address out of the equation completely. I had hoped the Win Clients would just accept the CNR presented v6 addresses as presented. Perhaps M$ wants us to buy the new Vista client as it does have a DHCPv6 client where as the Win2003/WinXP clients do not have such a client.
If I understand correctly, CNR can hand out network prefixes of ANY size but the end client must be programmed with the correct DHCP software to accept the CNR presented prefix. -RIGHT?
On a side note and not intended to be a slam on anyone!
Oh and yes I understand the idea that v6 addresses are enormous but isn't this the same thing we thought about the first PC memory and the original IPv4 address space - just give it out freely, we have plenty. Ha.
>>>>If I understand correctly, CNR can hand out network prefixes of ANY size but the end client must be programmed with the correct DHCP software to accept the CNR presented prefix. -RIGHT? <<<<
That is correct.
>>>>On a side note and not intended to be a slam on anyone!
Oh and yes I understand the idea that v6 addresses are enormous but isn't this the same thing we thought about the first PC memory and the original IPv4 address space - just give it out freely, we have plenty. Ha. <<<<
Thanks for the conformation as this is what our wire-shark sniffer traces have been revealing to us.
BTW, Anyone know of a Win2003 or WinXP DHCP add-on client that would allow the OS to accept an address prefix smaller than /64?
If no add-on client for Win2003 or WinXP then we have four choices:
1. Accept the /64 prefix and be happy.
2. Static assignments with a /119 to match our current /24 IPv4 address network setup
3. Switch to a different OS (Other than M$)
4. Upgrade hardware and OS to support Vista
While a /64 network prefix provides about:
17,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 possible nodes on the same broadcased (FF01::1), one would think the "brains" would have setteled on a little bit smaller network size - but hey this is just me.
Introduction This article will help you understand the steps on how to
download the UCS licenses from the Cisco Systems website and then
installing it on the UCS. The redacted (blue lines) just covers up
certain numbers for privacy please do not take them...
Introduction This article will help you understand and educate the
customer on how to clear their "expired licenses"
(license-graceperiod-expired) from their UCS-M. If a customer just
purchased a license and needs a step by step guide on how to download
==================== VIC FNIC driver does not support Virtual Volumes (
second level LUN ID ) An enhancement request has been created to track
this feature - CSCux64473 UPDATE - 12-14-2016 We made some traction on
the enhancement request - The Fix is in t...