BCP: Slicing a /32 for an ISP
mtinka at globaltransit.net
Mon Apr 14 09:57:49 CEST 2008
On Monday 14 April 2008, Michael Adams wrote:
> I'm eager to hear more opinions about this. We are going
> to use /64 for all kind of network interfaces including
> point-to-point links and loopback interfaces.
We saw no point in using /64 especially for point-to-point
links and Loopback interfaces.
At my previous employer, our upstream provider decided to
use a /64 on a point-to-point transit link. It was their
network, but I could have done it differently - besides the
2 routers that talk to each other over this circuit for a
specific purpose, what other network elements are you
possibly going to have in between that justifies allowing
for 18,446,744,073,709,552,000 addresses, as opposed to
We, more or less, used the same argument for our LAN
segments. If our core network comprises a handful of
routers and switches, I'm sure even 65,536 addresses for a
few hundred nodes should be sufficient.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20080414/e18f6882/attachment-0001.bin
More information about the ipv6-ops