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] IPv6 residential service: What prefix, static, dynamic, extra cost ?
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 residential service: What prefix, static, dynamic, extra cost ?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 residential service: What prefix, static, dynamic, extra cost ?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mark Tinka
mark.tinka at seacom.mu
Thu May 19 10:30:24 CEST 2016
On 19/May/16 10:19, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > > My opinion is that anything between /56 and /48 is fine. As far as I > know, current RIPE policy gives the ISP the option to without > motivation, ask for enough IPv6 addresses to offer each customer a /48 > and I'd like to keep it that way. +1. > > But you're correct, it seems most deployments are going for /56 for no > more reason than that it "should work for everybody". Of course /48 > works as well as it's a superset of /56. I'm not going to give anyone > who gives everybody a /48 a hard time and I don't want RIPE to do it > either. +1. Mark.
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 residential service: What prefix, static, dynamic, extra cost ?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 residential service: What prefix, static, dynamic, extra cost ?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]