Using /126 for IPv6 router links

Joe Maimon jmaimon at
Tue Jan 26 15:27:12 UTC 2010

Daniel Senie wrote:
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 9:54 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
>> For me, the entire debate boils down to this question.
>> What should the objective be, decades or centuries?
> If centuries, how many planets and moons will the address space cover? (If we as a species manages to spread beyond this world before we destroy it). Will separate /3's, or subdivisions of subsequent /3's, be the best approach to deploying a large-scale IPv6 network on Mars? (and yes, a bit of work would be required to make the round-trip times fall within TCP's windows).

We already have numbering systems that are showing their age as they are 
hitting their late decades or even older.

Now if decades are good enough for you, how many of them? IPv4 is 3 and 
nearly certain to hit 4 and possibly 5. Wouldnt you like to do at least 
twice as well?

So calling for a system that should work for at least a 100 years is not 
as laughable as it may seem on the face of it -- in fact thats what the 
original promise of ipv6 was.

You make another excellent point. There may be other needs for the rest 
of the /3's that will take them out of the escape pod role.


More information about the NANOG mailing list