IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation are you giving out

Thu Oct 9 16:31:03 UTC 2014

Nanites, window blinds, and soda cans, I can believe. Molecules, I tend to doubt.

I think we will see larger network segments, but I think we will also see greater separation of networks into segments along various administrative and/or automatic aggregation boundaries. The virtual topologies you describe will likely also have related prefix consequences.

Owen

On Oct 9, 2014, at 7:39 AM, Roland Dobbins <rdobbins at arbor.net> wrote:

> 
> On Oct 9, 2014, at 2:15 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> 
>> Also, claiming that 90% will never have more than 2 or 3 subnets simply displays a complete lack of imagination.
> 
> On the contrary, I believe that the increase in the potential address pool size will lead to much flatter, less hierarchical networks - while at the same time leading to most nodes being highly multi-homed into various virtual topologies, thereby leading to significant increases of addresses per node.
> 
> A 'node' being things like molecules, nanites, window blinds, soda cans, etc.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Roland Dobbins <rdobbins at arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>
> 
>                   Equo ne credite, Teucri.
> 
>    		   	  -- Laocoön