zero suppression vs compression in addresses

[Drake Wilson]

Quoth Daniel Roesen <dr at cluenet.de>, on 2009-05-15 14:30:18 +0200:
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 03:44:27PM -0700, Alan Batie wrote:
> > (leading) zero *suppression* seems to be happening
> > at the same time within word (32 bit) boundaries, which colons always
> > delineate, making that really 2607:f678:0001::0/60.  Thus what I really
> > wanted to say was 2607:f678:1000::0/60.
> 
> Correct. The double-colon form replaces 1-n 32-bit "words" of zeros.

16-bit, no?  E.g., 2001:db8:1122:3344:5566:: uses a trailing
double-colon for the last 48 bits.

> Best regards,
> Daniel

   ---> Drake Wilson