IPv6 & virtual nic's - newbie question

Since I can get a huge block of IPv6 addresses from myISP I was thinking
that there are advantages. I can assign an IP address to each of my
clients: say 1000 or so and deliver custom www/whatever to each of them.

Obviously 1000 nics would be insane so I was wondering about creating
eth0:1->eth0:1000 using aliasing. Is this practical & what do ISP's etc do
if adminitering large numbers of IP addresses from 1 machine?

"dave" <foo@bar.com> wrote in message
news:3faf80d0$0$52883$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk.. .
>
> Obviously 1000 nics would be insane so I was wondering about creating
> eth0:1->eth0:1000 using aliasing. Is this practical & what do ISP's etc do
> if adminitering large numbers of IP addresses from 1 machine?

The great thing is, you don´t have to create virtual interfaces.
you can configure multiple addresses on the same interface.
there´s always the link local address fe80::xxx and one or more global
addresses.
see this one:
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:02:44:23:45:3B
inet addr:145.89.81.25 Bcast:145.89.81.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: 2001:888:1357:0:202:44ff:fe23:453b/64 Scope:Global
inet6 addr: 3ffe:8114:2000:1394:202:44ff:fe23:453b/64 Scope:Global
inet6 addr: 2001:888:1357::43/64 Scope:Global
inet6 addr: fe80::202:44ff:fe23:453b/10 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:264970 errors:22 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:11835 errors:23 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:46
collisions:94 txqueuelen:100
RX bytes:17954746 (17.1 Mb) TX bytes:1067775 (1.0 Mb)
Interrupt:11 Base address:0xfc00

So you don´t have to create sub/virtual interfaces.
I don´t think ISP´s would filter this, why would they...
they assigned the ipv6 space to you (probably a /48) so it woulkd be weird
to filter this.

Goodluck,
-Andree

Andree Toonk wrote:

> The great thing is, you don´t have to create virtual interfaces.
> you can configure multiple addresses on the same interface.
> there´s always the link local address fe80::xxx and one or more global
> addresses.
> see this one:
> eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:02:44:23:45:3B
> inet addr:145.89.81.25 Bcast:145.89.81.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
> inet6 addr: 2001:888:1357:0:202:44ff:fe23:453b/64 Scope:Global
> inet6 addr: 3ffe:8114:2000:1394:202:44ff:fe23:453b/64
> Scope:Global inet6 addr: 2001:888:1357::43/64 Scope:Global
> inet6 addr: fe80::202:44ff:fe23:453b/10 Scope:Link
> UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
> RX packets:264970 errors:22 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> TX packets:11835 errors:23 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:46
> collisions:94 txqueuelen:100
> RX bytes:17954746 (17.1 Mb) TX bytes:1067775 (1.0 Mb)
> Interrupt:11 Base address:0xfc00
>

ah! thanks
So in my example I 'merely' have to have 1000 such entries in the /etc
networking/interfaces file for that interface, or do I have to specify them
individually or is there some kind of snazzy range syntax meaning 'use this
range for this interface'?

dave wrote:

> Since I can get a huge block of IPv6 addresses from myISP I was thinking
> that there are advantages. I can assign an IP address to each of my
> clients: say 1000 or so and deliver custom www/whatever to each of them.
>
> Obviously 1000 nics would be insane so I was wondering about creating
> eth0:1->eth0:1000 using aliasing. Is this practical & what do ISP's etc do
> if adminitering large numbers of IP addresses from 1 machine?

One thing to consider, is who'd be accessing those addresses? If someone
out on the IPv4 internet, they'd have to map all those addresses into IPv4,
which means you won't likely be able to use them all.

--

Fundamentalism is fundamentally wrong.

To reply to this message, replace everything to the left of "@" with
james.knott.

James Knott wrote:

> One thing to consider, is who'd be accessing those addresses? If someone
> out on the IPv4 internet, they'd have to map all those addresses into
> IPv4, which means you won't likely be able to use them all.
>
Good point. I think most of my punters woul be using IE (*sigh*) which AFAIK
is ipv6 enabled so I'm assuming it would be possible to point them at
apache (whch is IPv^ enabled).
Not sure about MS VirusExpress though

dave wrote:

> James Knott wrote:
>
>> One thing to consider, is who'd be accessing those addresses? If someone
>> out on the IPv4 internet, they'd have to map all those addresses into
>> IPv4, which means you won't likely be able to use them all.
>>
> Good point. I think most of my punters woul be using IE (*sigh*) which
> AFAIK is ipv6 enabled so I'm assuming it would be possible to point them
> at apache (whch is IPv^ enabled).
> Not sure about MS VirusExpress though

Regardless if they're v6 enabled or not, if they reach you via IPv4, they
won't be able to access all those addresses, unless other means, such as a
VPN are employed.
--

Fundamentalism is fundamentally wrong.

To reply to this message, replace everything to the left of "@" with
james.knott.