[130985] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Definitive Guide to IPv6 adoption
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marshall Eubanks)
Mon Oct 18 20:45:48 2010
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@americafree.tv>
In-Reply-To: <86aambhw90.fsf@seastrom.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 20:45:30 -0400
To: "Robert E. Seastrom" <rs@seastrom.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Oct 18, 2010, at 8:16 PM, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
>=20
> sthaug@nethelp.no writes:
>=20
>> I still haven't seen any good argument for why residential users need
>> /48s. No, I don't think "that makes all the address assignments the
>> same size" is a particularly relevant or convincing argument.
>>=20
>> We're doing /56 for residential users, and have no plans to change
>> this.
>=20
> If we were to give a /48 to every human on the face of the planet, we
> would use about .000025 of the total available IPv6 address space.
>=20
> You are to be commended for your leadership in conserving space. Our
> children will surely be grateful that thanks to your efforts they have
> 99.99999% of IPv6 space left to work with rather than the paltry
> 99.9975% that might have been their inheritance were it not for your
> efforts. Bravo!
>=20
It makes a bigger difference if everyone starts using 6RD - to give out =
a /48 effectively=20
requires a /16, and the number of /16s is by no means approximately =
infinite.=20
Regards
Marshall
> -r
>=20
>=20
>=20
