This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] 2006-02 Last Call for Comments (IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-02 Last Call for Comments (IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-02 Last Call for Comments (IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Wed Jun 27 16:45:41 CEST 2007
Hi, On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 10:32:52AM -0400, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > Are you assuming that organizations never subnet inside a building ? > > In IPv6 if you want to keep things working, the minimum network is /64, so > if somebody want to subnet, you need to give them something bigger, and > current IETF recommendations are still /48, as per RFC3177. There's nothing in the IETF recommendations that says "per building". So giving a customer a /48, and having that customer assign /56s out of that space to individual buildings, and taking /64s from there to individual LAN networks, is a perfectly workable approach. Gert Doering -- APWG chairs -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 113403 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-02 Last Call for Comments (IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-02 Last Call for Comments (IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]