nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks?
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 20:22:45 -0800
A /112 is almost as bad for the ND attacks as a /64, so, I don't see any reason to use a /112 at all. IMHO, the preferred link network sizes for IPv6 are, in order, /64, /127, /126, /112. Since there's no downside to the first one so long as you take proper precautions about ND attacks, most environments can stop there. If you are actually worried about ND, then consider /127. The only reason to avoid it is if you have routers with code implementing RFCs that have been deprecated for more than 5 years. Better to update your code, but, if you can't, move to /126. It's a silly number, but, at least it's a little less silly than /112. Owen On Nov 29, 2011, at 9:00 AM, McCall, Gabriel wrote:
Note that /127 is strongly discouraged in RFC5375 and RFC3627. 3627 suggests using /112 for router links, or /126 at the very most. -----Original Message----- From: Fred Baker [mailto:fred () cisco com] ... I see no reason you couldn't use a /127 prefix if the link was point to point. ...
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks?, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Mark Blackman (Nov 30)
- RE: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Nathan Eisenberg (Nov 30)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Bill Stewart (Nov 30)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Mark Blackman (Nov 30)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Ray Soucy (Nov 30)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 30)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Leo Bicknell (Nov 30)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Jimmy Hess (Nov 30)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Jimmy Hess (Nov 30)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Leo Bicknell (Nov 30)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Owen DeLong (Nov 29)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Dmitry Cherkasov (Nov 29)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Brzozowski, John (Nov 30)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Ray Soucy (Nov 29)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Leo Bicknell (Nov 29)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Ray Soucy (Nov 29)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Owen DeLong (Nov 29)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Jeff Wheeler (Nov 28)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 28)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Jonathan Lassoff (Nov 28)
- Re: IPv6 prefixes longer then /64: are they possible in DOCSIS networks? Dmitry Cherkasov (Nov 29)