IPv6 end user addressing

Thu Aug 11 03:00:05 UTC 2011

On Aug 10, 2011 7:45 PM, "Mark Newton" <newton at internode.com.au> wrote:
>
>
> On 11/08/2011, at 8:42 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> >
> > I suppose that limiting enough households to too small an allocation
> > will have that effect. I would rather we steer the internet deployment
> > towards liberal enough allocations to avoid such disability for the
> > future.
>
>
> I see the lack of agreement on whether /48 or /56 or /60 is good for a
> home network to be a positive thing.
>
> As long as there's no firm consensus, router vendors will have to
implement
> features which don't make silly hard-coded assumptions.
>
> Innovation will still happen, features will still be implemented, we'll
> still climb out of the NAT morass.  But we'll do it with CPE that allows
for
> a richer spectrum of variation than we would if we just said, "Dammit, /48
for
> everyone."
>
> It's all good.  At this stage of the game, any amount of "moving forward"
is
> better than staying where we are.
>
> (which reminds me: http://www.internode.on.net/news/2011/08/238.php It
ain't
> that hard)
>

Finally a useful post in this thread.  Good work on the deployment of real
ipv6!

Cb

>  - mark
>
> --
> Mark Newton                               Email:  newton at internode.com.au(W)
> Network Engineer                          Email:  newton at atdot.dotat.org (H)
> Internode Pty Ltd                         Desk:   +61-8-82282999
> "Network Man" - Anagram of "Mark Newton"  Mobile: +61-416-202-223
>
>
>
>
>
>