[157240] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Scott Weeks)
Thu Oct 11 18:03:44 2012
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 15:09:59 -0700
From: "Scott Weeks" <surfer@mauigateway.com>
To: <nanog@nanog.org>
Reply-To: surfer@mauigateway.com
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--- rcarpen@network1.net wrote:
From: Randy Carpenter <rcarpen@network1.net>
> --- jrhett@netconsonance.com wrote:
> From: Jo Rhett <jrhett@netconsonance.com>
> I've finally convinced $DAYJOB to deploy IPv6. Justification for the
> IP space is easy, however the truth is that a /64 is more than we
> need in all locations. However the last I heard was that you can't
> effectively announce anything smaller than a /48. Is this still
> true?
>
> Is this likely to change in the immediate future, or do I need to ask
> for a /44?
> ----------------------------------------------------
> A /48 is 65536 /64s and a /44 is 16x65536 /64s. If you
> only need one subnet (1 subnet = 1 /64), why would you
> try to get 16x65536 subnets, rather than the 65536 you
> have in the /48?
-------------------------------------------------------
He said it was for multiple sites.
---------------------------------------------------
DOH!
Note to self: focus on the outage and don't respond to NANOG
while troubleshooting. ;-)
scott
