[166005] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Larry Sheldon)
Mon Sep 30 20:38:29 2013
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:37:47 -0500
From: Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon@cox.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <W8671m01z1Una3W01869kK>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 9/27/2013 1:10 AM, Ryan McIntosh wrote:
> I don't respond to many of these threads but I have to say I've
> contested this one too only to have to beaten into my head that a /64
> is "appropriate".. it still hasn't stuck, but unfortunately rfc's for
> other protocols depend on the blocks to now be a /64..
>
> It's a waste, even if we're "planning for the future", no one house
> needs a /64 sitting on their lan.. or at least none I can sensibly
> think of o_O.
Are you accounting for connections to your refrigerator, water heater,
razor, vibrator, and on down to list so the gubermint can tell they when
you can use power for them?
--
Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics
of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to
learn from their mistakes.
(Adapted from Stephen Pinker)
