nanog mailing list archives
Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?
From: Randy Carpenter <rcarpen () network1 net>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 18:08:06 -0400 (EDT)
----------------------------------------------------A /48 is 65536 /64s and a /44 is 16x65536 /64s. If you only need one subnet (1 subnet = 1 /64), why would you try to get 16x65536 subnets, rather than the 65536 you have in the /48?------------------------------------------------------- He said it was for multiple sites. --------------------------------------------------- DOH! Note to self: focus on the outage and don't respond to NANOG while troubleshooting. ;-) scott
Sometimes a brief distraction can be therapeutic when under pressure ;-) -Randy
Current thread:
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?, (continued)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Scott Weeks (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Randy Carpenter (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Jo Rhett (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Randy Carpenter (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Justin M. Streiner (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? William Herrin (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Owen DeLong (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Randy Carpenter (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Jimmy Hess (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Randy Carpenter (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Scott Weeks (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Randy Carpenter (Oct 11)