[183567] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Subscriber Access Deployments
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Tue Sep 8 20:19:36 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
In-Reply-To: <660E364A-CB4F-40B9-8832-AD1F3CBAF03C@matthew.at>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2015 16:41:23 -0400
Cc: Josh Moore <jmoore@atcnetworks.net>, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1441744883_3480P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 13:13:55 -0700, Matthew Kaufman said:
> If you can't hang 4k customers off a switch, why does IPv6 need so many bits for the host portion?
Oh, it doesn't *need* that many. You can go ahead and run your IPv6 subnets
with a /96 or /112. Just remember that will piss off any hardware that tries
to do SLAAC. or a few other things.... :)
--==_Exmh_1441744883_3480P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001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=Vgxf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1441744883_3480P--
