nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 daydreams
From: Paul Jakma <paul () clubi ie>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 06:39:18 +0100 (IST)
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, David Barak wrote:
Wrong issue. What I'm unhappy about is not the size of the address - you'll notice that I didn't say "make the whole address space smaller." What I'm unhappy about is the exceedingly sparse allocation policies
You can allocate to 100% density on the network identifier if you want, right down to /64.
The host identifier simply is indivisible, and just happens to be 64bit.
regards, -- Paul Jakma paul () clubi ie paul () jakma org Key ID: 64A2FF6A Fortune: If swimming is so good for your figure, how do you explain whales?
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 daydreams, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Jeroen Massar (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Peter Dambier (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Paul G (Oct 17)
- Message not available
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Peter Dambier (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Mark Smith (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Randy Bush (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Mark Smith (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Kevin Loch (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams David Barak (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Jeroen Massar (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Paul Jakma (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams David Conrad (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams David Barak (Oct 19)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael . Dillon (Oct 17)