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/ipv6-wg@ripe.net/
[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] What is a site?
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Re: What is a site?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] What is a site?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Francis Dupont
Francis.Dupont at enst-bretagne.fr
Fri May 6 11:18:21 CEST 2005
In your previous mail you wrote: I also include my suggestions based on where I'm coming from :-) /60 for home networks (16 networks) => there are two reasons to use subnetting: - organization: this is in fact easy because stable/predictable and always handled by the manager - uncompatible links (like 802.11 and 1394): this will happen for home networking which should be handled automatically. With a hierarchical topology, the hD ratio should be good (~.8), with a mesh topology, random allocation of SLAs give a .5 value (cf birthday proble) for the HD ratio. Today we don't know how many links we'll get at the average but IMHO it should be 10~20 so /60 is clearly too small. BTW the DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation will be very nice because it can negociate the really needed prefix length. I believe it'll save us for the home network case, which will be as I explained an hour ago the critical one because of its very large number. Regards Francis.Dupont at enst-bretagne.fr
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Re: What is a site?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] What is a site?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]