Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course

Matthew Walster matthew at walster.org
Fri Jul 30 08:36:49 UTC 2010


On 30 July 2010 09:20, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:
> Even today, people are deploying multiple subnets in their homes.  For example, Apple's Airport allows you to trivially set up a "guest" network that uses a different prefix (192.168.0.0/24) and different SSID than your "normal" network (10.0.1.0/24).

Clearly, you think you're in the right and that you're making a valid
and salient point. I see the above as unreasonable rationale. The very
definition of "trivial" I would contend here - I honestly don't know a
single resi user who has even logged into their modem/router. They're
shipped with the username/password already entered by many ISPs these
days, so they don't even have to set it up, they just plug it an and
"use the internet".

There's no point in arguing this further. As you rightly say, there's
plenty of IPv6 space, I don't dispute the /48 point. I'm saying that
there is no need for a /63 let alone a /48. No, I'm not saying /63 is
a sensible allocation policy.

I've yet to be convinced of any need for more than one subnet in the
vast majority of residential internet cases. "sensornets" or otherwise
(a concept invented in the early 20th Century and still not present
outside of science fiction and commerce).

M




More information about the NANOG mailing list