end user assignment best practice

[David Magda]

On Mon, March 18, 2013 14:12, Ron Vachiyer wrote:
[...]
> In the case of an IPv6 prefix, the "WAN" interface of the device we
> provide will be using a /64 prefix taken from a pool set aside for
> loopbacks.  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?

You may want to look at RFC 6164, "Using 127-Bit IPv6 Prefixes on
Inter-Router Links":

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6164

It was published in April 2011, so I'm not sure how well-supported it is,
given the pace that RFC adoption often takes.