[175224] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation for Loopback
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Carpenter)
Sun Oct 12 12:55:08 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 12:54:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Randy Carpenter <rcarpen@network1.net>
To: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
In-Reply-To: <1292998589.649182.1413132893611.JavaMail.zimbra@network1.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
----- On Oct 12, 2014, at 8:53 AM, Sander Steffann sander@steffann.nl wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Op 11 okt. 2014, om 23:00 heeft Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net> het volgende
>> geschreven:
>>
>>> On Oct 11, 2014, at 2:09 PM, Tim Raphael <raphael.timothy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> From my research, various authorities have recommended that a single /64 be
>>>> allocated to router loopbacks with /128s assigned on interfaces.
>>>
>>> Yes, this is what I advocate for loopbacks.
>
> I often use the first /64 for loopbacks. Loopbacks are often used for
> management, iBGP etc and having short and easy to read addresses can be
> helpful. Something like 2001:db8::1 is easier to remember and type correctly
> than e.g. 2001:db8:18ba:ff42::1 :)
>
> Cheers,
> Sander
I concur. I think think some have gotten confused with the suggesting of allocating a /64 for *ALL* loopbacks versus allocating a full /64 per loopback. Loopbacks should be /128, but all loopbacks for a site should be within a single /64 (the first one for reasons others, including Sander have said.
-Randy
