[address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "c)"

Hi,

On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 11:29:21PM +0200, Hans Petter Holen wrote:
> >Again, this seems to exclude mobile operators who may only want to assign 
> >/64s to their customers' handsets...
>
> I dont se how  that assumption can be made. My mobile handset is 
> connected to the public internet so that I can get updated exchange 
> rates and read my email trough IMAP and so on.
> 
> (and not trough NAT as my mobile operator has offered my the choice of 
> not using NAT.)
> 
> Iff this had been IPv6 and Iff Bluetooth had worked seemlessly on my 
> other toys they could have had seemless access to the internet also.

Which would work fine with a /64 - "one big LAN with enough IPs"...

This yields two questions:

 - is it likely that we'll see mobile handsets that provide connectivity
   to *two* (or more) independent IPv6 LAN networks?   

   Like "bluetooth and WLAN, and not bridged"?

 - would a /60 suffice?

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  71007  (66629)

SpaceNet AG                    Mail: netmaster at Space.Net
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14      Tel : +49-89-32356-0
D- 80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-234