[195160] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Herrin)
Wed Jun 28 23:26:50 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
X-Really-To: <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <0D3AAB86-C266-4E2E-BF10-6B61D5E53AE6@wifirst.fr>
From: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 23:26:20 -0400
To: Olivier Benghozi <olivier.benghozi@wifirst.fr>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Olivier Benghozi <
olivier.benghozi@wifirst.fr> wrote:
> Well, /112 is not a stupid option (and is far smarter than /64): it
> contains the whole last nibble of an IPv6, that is x:x:x:x:x:x:x:1234.
> You always put 1 or 2 at the end, and if needed you are still able to
> address additional stuff would the point-to-point link become a LAN.
> And you don't throw away billions of addresses like with /64.
>
Hi Oliver,
You can always put 1 and 2 at the end on a /124 as well and add additional
devices. These are the same advantages of /124 over /126. And /124 doesn't
suffer from ND exhaustion attacks like /112 might. The only thing /112 buys
you (that I can see) is a single colon in front of the final digit. I don't
see how /112 would be a good choice.
Regards,
Bill Herrin
--
William Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us
Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
