nanog mailing list archives
RE: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum
From: "TJ" <trejrco () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:43:20 -0400
-----Original Message----- From: Justin M. Streiner [mailto:streiner () cluebyfour org] Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 5:29 PM To: Iljitsch van Beijnum Cc: nanog () nanog org Subject: Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum On Mon, 18 Aug 2008, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:On 18 aug 2008, at 21:18, Justin M. Streiner wrote:Just because IPv6 provides boatloads more space doesn't mean that I like wasting addresses :)That kind of thinking can easily lead you in the wrong direction. For instance, hosting businesses that cater to small customers generally have a lot of problems with their IPv4 address provisioning: for a customer that only needs one or a few IPv4 addresses, it's not feasible to create a separate subnet, because that wastes a lot of addresses. But invariably, these customers on shared subnets grow, so over time the logical subnet gathers more and more IPv4 address blocks that are shared by a relatively large number of customers, and because of resistance to renumbering, it's impossible to fix this later on.I don't have a problem with assigning customers a /64 of v6 space. My earlier comments were focused on network infrastructure comprised of mainly point-to-point links with statically assigned interface addresses. In that case, provisioning point-to-point links much larger than a /126, or at the maximum a /120 seems rather wasteful and doesn't make much sense.
Actually, in most cases - you would assign customers more than a /64. *Hopefully* a /56 as the smallest ... ~/48 for enterprises ...
jms
/TJ
Current thread:
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum, (continued)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Deepak Jain (Aug 18)
- RE: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum TJ (Aug 18)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 18)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Jay R. Ashworth (Aug 18)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Justin M. Streiner (Aug 18)
- RE: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum TJ (Aug 18)
- RE: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Antonio Querubin (Aug 18)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Deepak Jain (Aug 18)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Iljitsch van Beijnum (Aug 18)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Justin M. Streiner (Aug 18)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Iljitsch van Beijnum (Aug 18)
- RE: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum TJ (Aug 18)
- RE: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum michael.dillon (Aug 19)
- RE: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Justin M. Streiner (Aug 19)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Michael Thomas (Aug 19)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Randy Bush (Aug 19)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Nathan Ward (Aug 19)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Alain Durand (Aug 19)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Randy Bush (Aug 19)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Kevin Loch (Aug 19)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Iljitsch van Beijnum (Aug 20)
- Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum Sam Stickland (Aug 21)