[175211] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation for Loopback
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (=?utf-8?B?TcOlbnM=?= Nilsson)
Sat Oct 11 02:06:44 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 08:03:32 +0200
From: =?utf-8?B?TcOlbnM=?= Nilsson <mansaxel@besserwisser.org>
To: Faisal Imtiaz <faisal@snappytelecom.net>
In-Reply-To: <1070171971.148616.1413006103313.JavaMail.zimbra@snappytelecom.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
--hQiwHBbRI9kgIhsi
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation for Loopback Ad=
dress Date: Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 05:41:43AM +0000 Quoting Faisal Imtiaz (fa=
isal@snappytelecom.net):
> A follow up question on this topic..
>=20
> For Router Loopback Address .... what is wisdom in allocating a /64 vs /1=
28 ?
> (the BCOP document suggests this, but does not offer any explanation or m=
erits of one over the other).
I use a /128 -- these addresses are going to be used de-aggregated in
the IGP only; outside they are part of your aggregated allocation. Then
again; I'm using /127 on links. Just because it is a tad easier to do
dual-stack on the scripts that build the config. And, I get to have all
my links in 2001:0db8:f00:feed:dada::/80 :-)
--=20
M=C3=A5ns Nilsson primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina
MN-1334-RIPE +46 705 989668
I'm thinking about DIGITAL READ-OUT systems and computer-generated
IMAGE FORMATIONS ...
--hQiwHBbRI9kgIhsi
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlQ4yDMACgkQ02/pMZDM1cWR7QCgkLkYVVlrro0tg6heyDVGXjgF
1pkAnRCEl9jMz7zsiRvPHMV9cH1aLla0
=4YFM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--hQiwHBbRI9kgIhsi--
