minimum IPv6 announcement size

Darren Pilgrim nanog at
Thu Sep 26 19:29:17 UTC 2013

On 9/26/2013 1:52 AM, bmanning at wrote:
>   sounds just like folks in 1985, talking about IPv4...

The foundation of that, though, was ignorance of address space 
exhaustion.  IPv4's address space was too small for such large thinking. 
  IPv6 is far beyond enough to use such allocation policies.

More information about the NANOG mailing list