nanog mailing list archives
RE: Waste will kill ipv6 too
From: "Keith Medcalf" <kmedcalf () dessus com>
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 20:03:46 -0700
If you want to make that argument, that we shouldn’t have SLAAC and we should use /96 prefixes, that wouldn’t double the space, it would multiply it by roughly 4 billion.
I'm saying I should be able to use whatever size LAN I want.
You are totally free to do that if you please, no one is stopping you. Good luck finding hardware that will accomodate your wants. (As an old hag once said, you cannot get everything you wish for). --- The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.
Current thread:
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too, (continued)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Laszlo Hanyecz (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too James R Cutler (Dec 28)
- RE: Waste will kill ipv6 too Keith Medcalf (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Owen DeLong (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Mark Andrews (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Ricky Beam (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too William Herrin (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Mark Andrews (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Owen DeLong (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Ricky Beam (Dec 28)
- RE: Waste will kill ipv6 too Keith Medcalf (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Mark Andrews (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Lyndon Nerenberg (Dec 28)
- RE: Waste will kill ipv6 too Tony Wicks (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Lyndon Nerenberg (Dec 28)
- RE: Waste will kill ipv6 too Chuck Church (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Michael Crapse (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too valdis . kletnieks (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too valdis . kletnieks (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Lyndon Nerenberg (Dec 28)
- Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too Owen DeLong (Dec 29)