[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] What is a site?

I think it's important we give networks fixed size prefixes to lessen
the need for restructuring and renumbering when changing provider.

So I would say /64, /48, /48.

The ISP's who have got the /20-ish space already have planned this, 
I suspect.   It's the ones trying to run an ISP off a /32 that haven't?



On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 11:37:53AM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 9-mei-2005, at 9:17, Roger Jorgensen wrote:
> 
> >and the other view:
> 
> >/60 -> /52
> 
> (for networks with no router and networks with one router)
> 
> Giving a /52 to networks that don't have a router has the potential  
> to burn v6 space rather quickly. (Today those networks would get a /64.)
> 
> And why would a SOHO (small office, home office) or residential  
> network with just a single router need 4096 subnets (/52) rather than  
> 256 (/56) or 16 (/60)?
> 
> If they really need that many subnets it's probably better to stick  
> at the current /48 recommendation.
> 
> Iljitsch
> 
> --
> Iljitsch van Beijnum  -  http://www.bgpexpert.com/  (updated: May 6,  
> 22:39:15)

-- 
Tim/::1