[address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Elmar K. Bins
elmi at 4ever.de
Tue Jan 15 23:18:14 CET 2008
timothy.clarke at thecloud.net (Timothy Clarke) wrote: > From the little I've seen / read regarding IPv6 I get the impression > that people are starting to think of a IPv6 /48 in the same light as a > IPv4 /24. > > As such a /56 will fall into the same hole as longer IPv4 prefix's in > that no one wants to carry them. Same here. I'd not bother with a /56. I recommend using a /48 and nothing else. Same as for "special use v6 PI" - and the size has been chosen for a reason there. Yours, Elmar. -- "Hinken ist kein Mangel eines Vergleichs, sondern sollte als wesentliche Eigenschaft von Vergleichen angesehen werden." (Marius Fränzel in desd) --------------------------------------------------------------[ ELMI-RIPE ]---
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]