[114223] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Where to buy Internet IP addresses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Bates)
Mon May 4 18:01:38 2009
Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 17:01:32 -0500
From: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
To: Ricky Beam <jfbeam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <op.utfdabqhtfhldh@rbeam.xactional.com>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>, Bill Stewart <nonobvious@gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Ricky Beam wrote:
> "64bit MAC" -- which pretty much exists nowhere. It's a repeat of the
> mistakes from IPv4's early days: CLASSFUL ROUTING.
>
Given there is no CLASS, but just a separation of network and host, I'd
hate to compare it to classful routing. They probably would have been
happy with a /96 network except for stateless autoconfig, which is quite
nice for some stuff actually.
> I'm with you. I wish vendors and spec designers would just get over it
> and let people subnet however they want. If I want to set a network to
> be /96 or /120, I should be allowed to do so. Yes, I know autoconfig
> will not work -- and I don't want it to. I can make /31 IPv4 routes --
> no router I've ever used complained about it. (that sends 2 addresses to
> one place; what happens in the place is not the router's concern.)
I've not tried every vendor out there, but I've noticed some
implementations handle /127 just fine from a routing perspective. I
personally enjoy my /64 of /128 loopbacks. I'll be dead before I run out. :)
Jack
