Gert,
Gert Doering wrote: I just want to point out that this discussion is *not* about tunnels only. It's about generic addressing plans for point to-point links, and the failure of /64s to address the needs of *ops* types.
This discussion does not belong here. The RIRs responsibilities are what's on the right of /64, not what's on the left.
Unfortunately, ISP networks usually consist of *many* point-to point links, and all of them want to be addressed in a structured and time-saving (!) way. Which means "use some of the available bits to do structure" - and if you use up a /64 per link, you need those bits further up, and those are just not there in the current policy frame work.
Oh really? Mmmm, how many of the 4 billion /64s you have been allocated do you need? By my account, a network with 60k subnets including 1/3rd of ptp and loopbacks fits in a /44, including loss to internal aggregation.
(If the RIR->LIR allocation/assignment framework is changed to hand a /16 to every LIR, such a scheme might not be a problem. In the current scheme, it is).
If you can demonstrate that you need more than a /32, you might get it. Show us the numbers. Michel.