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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] IPv6 allocations for 6RD
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 allocations for 6RD
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 allocations for 6RD
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Marco Hogewoning
marcoh at marcoh.net
Mon Nov 30 22:20:33 CET 2009
> That's not the point. A /60 assignment is wrong. If software > developers and equipment vendors get the idea that /60 is > normal, then they will embed that assumption in their products > and it will make the transition from 6RD to native v6 more > difficult. You keep repeating this but which document or standard says /60 is wrong ? > There is no need to make customer assignments smaller > than /56. But why ? I can imagine /60 is enough for Joe the plumber even if sensor networks would take off... MarcoH
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 allocations for 6RD
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 allocations for 6RD
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]