Apologies for the direct folks, I sent this from the wrong address to the list.
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Christopher Morrow <christopher.mor...@gmail.com> wrote: > it also seems, to me at least, that there are a few involved ops folks > saying: "Hi, we like the idea of /127, we like the simplicity, we > understand how to do this... could you remove the > subnet-router-anycast bits for 'router' instances and let us get back > to operating this network for you?" > > It seems that listening to the folks running the network for you, in a > case that's not harmful to every other case you want to use the 96bit > longer addresses... makes some sense. > > -Chris > > On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 6:35 AM, Miya Kohno <mko...@juniper.net> wrote: >> Shin-san, >> >>> Actually, the text you wrote >>> >>> > And for LAN segments, I agree ND should be enhanced for >>> > solving the ND cache issue. >>> >>> caused my question >>> >>> How about inter-router ethernet links (with 3+ routers) >>> today we often use ? >>> >>> It seems to me that if we have solutions for the case of >>> inter-router ethernet links with more than three routers >>> against the problems you mentioned in the draft, they also >>> could be appicable for inter-router ethernet liks with only >>> two routers, I think. >>> >>> # Then, what happend if we can not have solutions for 3+ more >>> routers case ??? >> >> I think there is no generalized answer. It all depends. >> >> - If it's a typical LAN segment where plug and play is given, >> Then /64 of course (+ enhanced ND, hopefully) >> >> - If it's an inter-router link where plug'n play is not required, and >> the number of routers are limited and deterministic, >> Then appropriate prefix-length (e.g. > /112) can be chosen. It >> could mitigate the problems to a certain extent. (But not perfectly, >> unlike /127... So one might think the merit does not overweigh the >> advantage of uniformed /64.) >> >> Cheers, >> Miya >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >> ipv6@ietf.org >> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
