[130806] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Choice of network space when numbering interfaces with IPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeroen Massar)
Fri Oct 15 15:33:31 2010
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 21:32:56 +0200
From: Jeroen Massar <jeroen@unfix.org>
To: Zaid Ali <zaid@zaidali.com>
In-Reply-To: <C8DDF8E5.63178%zaid@zaidali.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2010-10-15 21:26, Zaid Ali wrote:
> SO I have been turning up v6 with multiple providers now and notice that
> some choose /64 for numbering interfaces but one I came across use a /126. A
> /126 is awfully large (for interface numbering) and I am curious if there is
> some rationale behind using a /126 instead of a /64.
You mean to say that a /126 is 'small' actually as it is only
2^(128-126) = 2^2 = 4 IP addresses while a /64 is......
For this discussion, please go through the archives.
In short: Personal preference of operators involved.
Greets,
Jeroen
