[136815] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Using IPv6 with prefixes shorter than a /64 on a LAN
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com)
Sat Feb 5 11:11:16 2011
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 16:08:09 +0000
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20110205124710.059259B4E31@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 11:47:10PM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> In message <4D4CA1B1.5060002@brightok.net>, Jack Bates writes:
> > On 2/4/2011 6:45 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > >
> > > I used to work for CSIRO. Their /16's which were got back in the
> > > late 80's will now be /48's.
> >
> > That's why I didn't try doing any adjustments of X is the new /32. The
> > whole paradigm changes.
>
> So why the ~!#! are you insisting on comparing IPv4 allocations with IPv6
> alocations.
"..96 more bits - no majik.."
> Mark
--bill
