[c-nsp] IPv6 subnets for point-to-point links

[bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com]

On Sun, May 08, 2005 at 02:00:28PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 11:19:46PM -1000, Randy Bush wrote:
> > > Maybe you could point us in the direction of this work? I would
> > > need good arguments to start using /64 on point to point links.
> > 
> > well, we used /24s for p2p in the rip days before cidr.  and i am
> > told that v6 space is effectively infinite.  maybe we should use
> > /48s for p2p so we don't have to renumber if they become networks.
> > </sarcasm>
> 
> What are you trying to say?  That all the existing RFCs that say
> "64 bit Host-ID is the way to go" are all garbage?  That a certain
> panel discussion at the RIPE meeting in prague, with certain IESG/IAB
> members on the panel advocating /48-for-everyone was severely misguided?

	not garbage - wasteful.
	misguided - i'd say yes.

	geoffs 0.94 work is interesting, but
	neglects the savings/longevity of "violating"
	the /64 restriction.

--bill

	
> gert
> 
> -- 
> USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
>                                                            //www.muc.de/~gert/
> Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert at greenie.muc.de
> fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/