Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming

Richard Hartmann richih.mailinglist at
Fri Nov 19 15:31:50 CST 2010

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 22:17, William Herrin <bill at> wrote:

> Bit, nibble and /64 then. /64 is treated specially by functions in the
> protocol (like SLAAC) thus it's a protocol boundary rather than a
> social one (/12 IANA allocations, /32 ISP allocations, /48 end-user
> assignments).

I would argue that /0 and /128 are somewhat special, too.

> Unless you particularly feel the need to assign /64's to router
> loopbacks, you'll see plenty of routes longer than /64 in your table
> too.

That's a personal preference, really. Unless you mess up, or are an
end user permanently stuck with a /64 (in which case your ISP messed
up), there isn't really much need to assign anything longer, though.
That being said, for whatever reason, several of my upstreams use /126
for their sessions.

In any case, other than "some people might see the colons as magic
markers" I don't really see an argument in favour of avoiding a common
name. And that does not seem to hold much water. This is not meant to
be an attack, I simply wonder if I am missing something.


More information about the NANOG mailing list