[75642] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Stupid Ipv6 question...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Crist Clark)
Fri Nov 19 13:14:09 2004
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 10:11:36 -0800
From: Crist Clark <crist.clark@globalstar.com>
In-reply-to: <1100880925.92838.60.camel@callisto.noc.catch.no>
To: Lars Erik Gullerud <lerik@nolink.net>
Cc: Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org>,
North American Noise and Off-topic Gripes <nanog@merit.edu>
Reply-To: crist.clark@globalstar.com
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Lars Erik Gullerud wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-11-19 at 16:36, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>
>
>>/127 prefixes are assumed for point-to-point links, and presumably an
>>organization will divide up a single /64 for all ptp links -- unless they
>>have more than 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 of them.
>
>
> While that would seem logical for most engineers, used to /30 or /31 ptp
> links in IPv4 (myself included)
Aren't most engineers used to the fact that point-to-point links are
not broadcast links and therefore the concept of a network/netmask for
the interface is somewhat useless? In addition, link-local addressing
eliminates many situations where you need to allocate tiny blocks for
p2p links.
--
Crist J. Clark crist.clark@globalstar.com
Globalstar Communications (408) 933-4387
