nanog mailing list archives
Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable?
From: William Herrin <bill () herrin us>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 10:49:28 -0700
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 10:20 AM Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:
The minimum addressable on a LAN is a /64.not really
The minimum (and maximum) subnet mask for a LAN in which -all- of IPv6's technologies work right is /64. If you don't require stateless autoconfiguration or automatic link-local addresses, you can pick any subnet mask you want. In most cases it's desirable to have a size of /64. In a few cases it's not. Short version: use /64 as your IPv6 LAN subnet mask unless you clearly understand the consequences of not doing so and intentionally want them. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill () herrin us https://bill.herrin.us/
Current thread:
- Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Adam Thompson (May 14)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Mel Beckman (May 14)
- RE: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Adam Thompson (May 14)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? William Herrin (May 15)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Nicolas VUILLERMET (May 15)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Adam Thompson (May 15)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Michel Blais (May 15)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Randy Bush (May 15)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? William Herrin (May 15)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Mel Beckman (May 14)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Jay Acuna (May 15)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Mel Beckman (May 15)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? William Herrin (May 16)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Mel Beckman (May 16)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Willy Manga (May 15)
- Re: Q: is RFC3531 still applicable? Willy Manga (May 15)