nit on the nit...
HD is calculated for prefixes (e.g. on a basis of /48), instead of
*being* based on endpoint addresses as IPv4 is.
(the second part needed a verb)
On Sep 25, 2008, at 12:51 PM, Tony Hain wrote:
Wording nit in 2.4.2
Current:
HD is calculated for sites (e.g. on a basis of /
And we're still persisting with a recommendation for /126 for p2p
router links and against /127?
I guess that's the current state of things.
bias disclosure: I'm in favour of /127, vis.
http://www.apnic.net/meetings/26/program/apops/matsuzaki-ipv6-p2p.pdf
In light of Maz's presentation (see link
Wording nit in 2.4.2
Current:
HD is calculated for sites (e.g. on a basis of /48), instead of based
on addresses like with IPv4
should read:
HD is calculated for prefixes (e.g. on a basis of /48), instead of based
on endpoint addresses like with IPv4
It is not clear that the 6bone space dis
