How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

Israel G. Lugo israel.lugo at
Wed Oct 7 19:58:08 UTC 2015

On 10/03/2015 08:40 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> So a /48 isn’t about being able to support 295,147,905,179,352,825,856 devices in every home, it’s about being able to have 16 bits of subnet mask to use in delegating addresses in a dynamic plug-and-play hierarchical topology that can evolve on demand without user configuration or intervention.

Which is IMO scarcely enough to be as flexible as IPv6 is being touted.
I've always considered 16 bits of subnetting way too small for an end
site. Especially if you want to do things like dynamic plug-and-play
hierarchical topology. Just following Robin Johansson's example in
another email:

On 10/02/2015 07:08 PM, Robin Johansson wrote:
> If a /48 is assigned to each customer, then the first wireless router
> gets a /52, second router a /56 and there is room to connect one more
> level of devices. All works out of the box, everyone is happy, no
> support calls.

We only have up to 3 levels, and each level only supports 16 branches.
May be fine for mom and dad now, but certainly not for other complex
cases. And when you start factoring the whole "soup cans with IPv6" thing...

I still think IPv6 should've been at least 192 bits long.

Israel G. Lugo

More information about the NANOG mailing list