[121791] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Smith)
Wed Jan 27 07:38:51 2010
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 23:08:36 +1030
From: Mark Smith <nanog@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org>
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <74C0E810-5808-4FF1-AFA6-329C35BC896E@delong.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 03:09:11 -0800
Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 27, 2010, at 2:38 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> >> The general intent of the /48 allocation is that it is large enough for
> >> nearly everybody, with nearly everybody including all but the largest
> >> of organisations.
> >
> > the general intent of a class B allocation is that it is large enough
> > for nearly everybody, with nearly everybody including all but the
> > largest of organisations.
> >
> > hmmmmm
> >
> > randy
>
> That would, indeed, work if we weren't short of class B networks
> to assign.
>
And we shrunk the Internet.
