[175071] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation are you giving out
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Conrad)
Thu Oct 9 00:55:31 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <2083423091.131955.1412829918586.JavaMail.zimbra@snappytelecom.net>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 21:55:22 -0700
To: Faisal Imtiaz <faisal@snappytelecom.net>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Faisal,
On Oct 8, 2014, at 9:45 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal@snappytelecom.net> =
wrote:
> So, this is more of a 'opinion' / 'feel' (with all due respect) =
comment, and not something which has a (presently) compelling technical =
reasoning behind it ?
The technical reasoning behind /48 has been documented in many places. =
Lots of folks, particularly those who=92ve struggled with justifying =
their =93need=94 for IPv4 have developed =93=91opinion=92 / =91feel=92=94 =
about conserving address space. If you remove the limitations of IPv4 in =
terms of quantity of address space, what are the compelling technical =
reasons for longer than /48?
Regards,
-drc
