Hi Iljitsch,
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 09:54:54 -0400
Iljitsch van Beijnum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree, except that /56 is still too large for small / home
> networks, and I fear that ISPs will want to skimp even more and give
> out /64s.
I'd think the market would sort that out very qui
On 14 jul 2006, at 06.05, Jason Schiller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
IMHO moving the boundary to a /56 is completely missing the boat on
what
the actual problem is. We discovered that classful addresses were a
mistake and moved to variable length subnet masks. Let's not
repeat this
mistak
On 13 jul 2006, at 23.45, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
First. giving out a /48 to every home network (which today has at
most
a handful of machines, which means, one subnet would suffice) is
Part of the problem is what each of us considers enough, and this
may depend
on knowledge about dev
I'm referring to route aggregation, in case that wasn't clear.
> -Original Message-
> From: Manfredi, Albert E
> Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 2:06 PM
> To: 'Iljitsch van Beijnum'; IETF IPv6 Mailing List
> Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: draft-narten-ipv6-3177bis-48boundary-02.txt
>
Iljitsch van Beijnum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
[ ... ]
> Then there are technical considerations for a minimum size
> assignment. Today, most end-users connect one or more hosts in their
> site to the internet through an intermediate device that, amongst
> other functionality, funct
On 13-jul-2006, at 12:21, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
draft-narten-ipv6-3177bis-48boundary-02.txt
After speaking with Thomas shortly in the hallway yesterday I
understand that he doesn't feel it's appropriate (anymore) to tell
the RIRs what prefix sizes to use. I don't necessarily agree wi
On 14-jul-2006, at 8:50, Mark Smith wrote:
If everyone accepts that ipv6 addresses have variable length
subnet masks
(and everyone has the appropriate tools to handle this)
Actually the SUBNET mask is now pretty much fixed at 64 bits. From
RFC 3513:
For all unicast addresses, except t
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 00:20:49 -0400 (EDT)
"Jason Schiller ([EMAIL PROTECTED])" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
>
> > It
> > should be stressed that having different prefix sizes in the market
> > place leads to higher operational cost because moving
