/127 between routers?

[Seth Mattinen]

Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ipv6-ops-bounces+mksmith=adhost.com at lists.cluenet.de
>> [mailto:ipv6-ops-bounces+mksmith=adhost.com at lists.cluenet.de] On
> Behalf
>> Of Mark Tinka
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 8:48 AM
>> To: ipv6-ops at lists.cluenet.de
>> Cc: Alexandre Dulaunoy
>> Subject: Re: /127 between routers?
>>
>> * PGP Signed by an unknown key
>>
>> On Wednesday 06 January 2010 12:34:59 am Alexandre Dulaunoy
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On our side, we are using /120 (easy to calculate
>>> and remember) for ptp between routers without any
>>> issues.
>> Over here, /126's for point-to-points, /112's for LAN's.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Mark.
> 
> We use /64's for interfaces/interface sets/ and route /48's through and
> to those interfaces.  Am I in the minority when I look at the fact that
> I have 65k /48's and don't really feel the need to subnet beyond a /64?
> Operationally, it makes things much simpler as well (in my opinion, of
> course).  I get my lower level techs to think in terms of /64's and
> /48's rather than those plus any number of more specific subnets.  I
> haven't had to do much to tweak our backend systems (all home grown) to
> manage these values, etc.
> 
> Granted, I do use /128's for loopback addresses.
> 

Could be a minority, but you're not alone. I've been using /128's for
loopbacks and /64 for everything else since I went dual-stack.

~Seth