Mark; Yes - 100% hypothetical. That's a reason not to make too much of my "what if" question - it may not come up in the real world often enough for us to spend time discussing it. That's why I'm not pushing - just asking.
Spence > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Smith > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 4:11 AM > To: Mark Smith > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ipv6@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Can I generate a prefix shorter than /48 using > <draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-09.txt>? > > On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 18:56:26 +0930 > Mark Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi John, > > > > On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 19:55:27 -0700 > > "John Spence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > If my organization is large, and I will petition my ISP > for a /44, > > > or even a /40, I'd like to be able to use the mechanism outlined > > > above to randomly generate myself a Unique Local /40 > prefix so I can > > > map my routable and site-restricted space as I desire. > > > > > > > Out of interest sake, if you are able to tell me, I'm curious how > > large ? I'd have thought a /46 or 256K subnets would have > been large > > enough for the largest organisations in the world, even > allowing for > > unused subnets due to aggregation to allow for multiple > instances of > > IGPs separated by BGP internally, as IGPs may be limited in > how many > > subnets they can carry. At least to me, a /40 (or just a /40 size > > address space of different /48s) for a single organisations' subnet > > requirements is pretty much inconceivable. > > > > I've just realised that the above scenario might by > hypothetical rather than actual. Is that the case ? > > Thanks, > Mark. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
