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] 2015-03 New Policy Proposal (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-03 New Policy Proposal (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-03 New Policy Proposal (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at inex.ie
Mon May 11 15:08:11 CEST 2015
On 11/05/2015 11:10, Gert Doering wrote: > I see "/32 as default, up to /29 if you ask" as very reasonable middle > ground... /29 gives 2^19 /48s, or a little over 500k /48s or 134 million /56s. Before supporting this proposal, I'd be interested to see a real life addressing plan which needed more than this amount of bit space. Nick
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-03 New Policy Proposal (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-03 New Policy Proposal (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]