Well it should be redesigned so it works all the way down to individual addresses.
Well it should be redesigned so it works all the way down to individual addresses.
DHCPv6 also does not work without RA. DHCPv6 just assigns an address, a routable prefix, dns servers etc, it does not assign a subnet or any routes, you need route advertisements for that.
Why? What's wrong with how it works at the moment?
Collisions are very unlikely, and a quick ARP packet should detect them if they do happen.
You can do that, sure. But it's more complex and slower.
Using a mac address in the IP is terrible anyway from a privacy point of view, use a random IP in the subnet, send out a check to see if it's already used, if it is choose a new one. That check is already a feature of ipv6.
Oh and I ended up disabling IPv6 altogether as their router would crap itself with a modest amount of IPv6 traffic. Pulling ~10Mbps of IPv6 would completely DoS the router, as it would not even go as far as answering to ARP. Some quality hardware for sure.
Same goes for ipv6. If you get one single net (and a 'small' one at that), you once again have to resort to trickery to subnet at your end.
Preferably in both cases, you would get a small (/31 for v4, /127 for v6) transport net that goes to the ISP router or your first fw device, then the ISP routes the real net /24 (or whatever size you can get from it on v6) behind your IP on the /31,/127 so that your first device can split this in any way you prefer.
At least with the current state of affairs, you have the option to use ND Proxy instead of NAT66.