[121658] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Sat Jan 23 21:40:57 2010
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <0C4E3B08-C930-411A-8E8E-53B528C039E8@mironet.ch>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 18:24:26 -0800
To: Mathias Seiler <mathias.seiler@mironet.ch>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jan 23, 2010, at 4:52 AM, Mathias Seiler wrote:
> Hi=20
>=20
> In reference to the discussion about /31 for router links, I d'like to =
know what is your experience with IPv6 in this regard.
>=20
> I use a /126 if possible but have also configured one /64 just for the =
link between two routers. This works great but when I think that I'm =
wasting 2^64 - 2 addresses here it feels plain wrong.
>=20
> So what do you think? Good? Bad? Ugly? /127 ? ;)
>=20
Use the /64... It's OK... IPv6 was designed with that in mind.
64 bits is enough networks that if each network was an almond M&M, you =
would be able to fill all of the
great lakes with M&Ms before you ran out of /64s.
Owen
>=20
> Cheers
>=20
> Mathias Seiler
>=20
> MiroNet GmbH, Strassburgerallee 86, CH-4055 Basel
> T +41 61 201 30 90, F +41 61 201 30 99
>=20
> mathias.seiler@mironet.ch
> www.mironet.ch
>=20
