Hi, On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 05:09:29PM +0100, Francis Dupont wrote:
In your previous mail you wrote:
We use /124s for tunnels, which avoid the problems from Pekka's draft
=> what is the standard which defines a /124 for a link?
What is the standard that prohibits doing this? There is good reason not to do /126 or /127, but I can't see any strong reason (except "one size fits all", which is never true) to use /64.
(anycast), but doesn't waste /64s needlessly.
=> we have a French expression for that: �conomie de bouts de chandelles.
In a dynamically routed backbone, it's very important to actually *see* which ways a packet travels (traceroute), and occasionally to be able to do hop-by-hop diagnostics. All this requires routed ptp addresses,
=> no, in fact you simply need a fixed address per router.
If you have multiple lines between routers, it can be quite important which of those is used.
but there is no need for a /64 here. => there is no choice in the standard: all prefixes on a link are /64s.
Please quote the RFC that *mandates* /64s for all links. As far as I remember, it's a SHOULD for multiaccess links, and voluntary for ptp links. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 56029 (55671) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299