Iljitsch van Beijnum writes: > And in reaction to other posts: there is no need to make the maximum > address length unlimited, just as long as it's pretty big, such as > ~256 bits.
But there isn't much reason to not make it unlimited, as the overhead is very small, and specific implementations can still limit the actual address length to a compromise between infinity and the real-world network that the implementation is expected to support. > The point is not to make the longest possible addresses, > but to use shorter addresses without shooting ourselves in the foot > later when more address space is needed. Use unlimited-length addresses that can expand at _either_ end, and the problem is solved. When more addresses are needed in one location, you add bits to the addresses on the right; when networks are combined and must have unique addresses, you add bits on the left. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
