<div dir="ltr">On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Ron Vachiyer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:proutfoo@outlook.com" target="_blank">proutfoo@outlook.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div><div dir="ltr">Is it acceptable practice to number the "LAN" interface using a /64 taken from the /48 assigned for the customer, or is it current practice to use a second /64 outside of the /48 to route the /48 to customer equipment? In other words, in a scenario such as this, are we to provide [/64 + /64 + /48] or [/64 + (/48 - /64)] to the end site?<br>
<br>Thanks for any input or RTFM material on the subject,<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>You could RTFM RFC 6603, which is intended to be used in this scenario. Not sure how many clients support it. I personally think it's reasonable to reserve one of the 65536 /64s to number the connection, but that's just me.</div>
</div></div></div>