In message <20090219194255.3489565e.i...@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosen
se.org>, Mark Smith writes:
> On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 00:08:18 +0100
> Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Mark Smith a =E9crit :
> > > On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:16:33 +0100 Alexandru Petrescu =
> 
> > > <alexandru.petre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > =
> 
> > >> Mark Smith a =E9crit :
> > >>> On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:03:54 +0100 Alexandru Petrescu =
> 
> > >>> <alexandru.petre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> =
> 
> > >>>> Dunn, Jeffrey H. a =E9crit :
> > >>>>> Alex,
> > >>>>> =
> 
> <snip>
> > =
> 
> > Well somewhere here there's a paradox.  An operator gives me a /64
> > telling me it's more than I'd ever need.  Which is true, it could
> > accommodate 2^64 nodes.
> > =
> 
> 
> Well, if you have an alernative providers that will give you /48s (or
> maybe /56s - I don't really like them, because now there's two
> allocation sizes instead of the single /48 size, but they're still far
> better than being given a single /64), give them your business instead.
> The single /64 operator is being excessively and unnecessarily
> conservative with IPv6 address space. You shouldn't have to work around
> their unnecessary IPv6 address space constraints, and neither should
> equipment vendors or the IETF.
 
        Especially when the RIR's and LIR's are handing out address
        space to ISP's on the assumption they are in turn handing out
        /56 or /48's.
        
> Regards,
> Mark.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: mark_andr...@isc.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to