Fully agree with this view. I think if we really want to go into this direction, the HD ratio modification seems a better idea. I actually have already thought long time ago that we can't compare in terms of efficiency IPv4 with IPv6, so no reason for keeping the same ratio. Regards, Jordi
De: Daniel Roesen <dr@cluenet.de> Responder a: "ipv6-wg-admin@ripe.net" <ipv6-wg-admin@ripe.net> Fecha: Mon, 9 May 2005 14:10:08 +0200 Para: <ipv6-wg@ripe.net> Asunto: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: What is a site?
On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 12:40:37PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
Personally, I opt for a /128+/64+/56+/48 model, with a suffiently relaxed policy that permits /48 assignments to anything that risks being limited by 256 subnets.
So typical large-scale DSL rollouts can be provisioned on an automated base with /56s, providing enough space for 99.99% of all customers ("pick another arbitrary number").
I do agree that /56s will be enough for almost all customers. But then you will see scenarious that people outgrow the /56 and need a new /48 and renumber AND restructure their network into this new space. THIS is what "/48 for everone" is trying to prevent as much as possible. Reserving a /48 space but only assigning /56 makes no sense either. A /56 is 256 subnets only if ignoring ANY hierarchy. If you accept 2-3 levels of hierachy into the customer network, your efficiency goes down, and 8bits of subnetting starts to smell v4ish again.
I could probably agree to /56 for residential access though. But definately not for non-residential access like non-miniature companies, universities etc.
Do we really gain enough by going down to /56 that is worth the hassle?
IMHO, changing the HD-Ratio is a better idea, with no downside I can currently see (can anyone?).
Best regards, Daniel
-- CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
************************************ Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit Registration open. Information available at: http://www.ipv6-es.com This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.