[address-policy-wg] 2005-08 New Policy Proposal
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-08 New Policy Proposal
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-08 New Policy Proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Thu Oct 6 14:00:06 CEST 2005
Hi, On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 11:42:28AM +0100, Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com wrote: > The technology specifies that a "network" should be assigned > a /64 but this thing called a "network" may not be an > Ethernet broadcast domain. Different people will do different > things with devices and this will lead them to use different > address allocation strategies. For instance, consider an > RS-232 cable daisychained through a factory with modems to > handle the signal strength amplification when the signal > gets too strong. Imagine 10 devices attached to this daisy > chained RS 232 cable which use IPv6 to communicate. One > might consider this a network or one might not. > > Is this decision a public policy decision or not? No, as this is not related to policy. But if the owner of that network comes and asks for addresses, the policy has a very clear answer: he will not get "10" addresses, but at least a /64. If the daisy chain is organized in a way that more than one broadcast segment makes technical sense, he will get more than a /64. (And *this* discussion is precisely about the question how much "more than a /64" is - a /56 or a /48). Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 81421 SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster at Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 D- 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-234
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-08 New Policy Proposal
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-08 New Policy Proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]