[c-nsp] IPv6 Subnetting - Service Provider

[Paul Stewart]

Thanks for the replies...

Yeah, I'm getting various pieces of feedback - I'm going with the /126 for
point to point and /128 for loopback on core devices at this point.  I don't
trust the autoconfiguration ideas at this point (call it old school)
anyways...;)

Paul


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Justin M. Streiner
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 4:05 PM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] IPv6 Subnetting - Service Provider

On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Paul Stewart wrote:

> In a SP environment, what's common practice so far with subnetting?
> Typically, in IPv4 today we use a /30 or /29 for point to point and each
> device has a /32 loopback...
>
> I've been reading a lot of different opinions and everyone seems to
> recommend a /64 for each link (router) or a server - why so large?  I'd
love
> to see a layout of a few routers in a SP core network and how they've
> subnetted them....;)

This debate rolled on NANOG a few weeks ago.  People generally broke into
two camps - one advocated using /64s on point-to-point links, and the other
advocated smaller subnets such as /126 for point-to-points and /128s for
loopbacks.  So, I guess the consensus is that there isn't one :)

jms
_______________________________________________
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/