On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 2:11 PM, William Waites <wwai...@tardis.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > On Sun, 9 Nov 2014 13:54:07 +0100, Roger Jørgensen <rog...@gmail.com> said: > > > It's a good start, but could you rewrite the part on "Address > > Allocation" > > Well, yes, that was just a placeholder sentence! But I've made the > change as you asked. I'm not sure I agree though, and the reason is > not to do with efficiency of address space use but operational ease > of provisioning. > > Operationally, what does this mean? The most common case is going to > be a single subnet, so how is the gateway going to know which one out > of the /56 to use? Somebody has to pick a /64 to put on the inside > ethernet interface. How is this done? No problem *assigning* a /56 but > using it is another matter.
ah I see, bad wording from my side. Any _end-user_ should get minimum a /56 for their use, an assignment. How they use that assignment are another technical matter - that's the operational side. On the actual use of IPv6 addresses I guess https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-6man-why64-01 is a better source for information. It mention cases where a /64 is the best choice, and where other sizes can, and can not be used. -- Roger Jorgensen | ROJO9-RIPE rog...@gmail.com | - IPv6 is The Key! http://www.jorgensen.no | ro...@jorgensen.no
