On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 2:40 AM, Markus Stenberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 26.6.2015 18.41, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:

> Even implementation isn't limited to it.
>
>> And sorry if I sound like a broken record, but I would like the ability
>> to set up a router-router link with less than a full /64 allocated to
>> it, at least in the ad-hoc case.
>
>
> I am not sure about the draft text about what it should say, as non-/64
> seems to be a political hot potato (there are drafts on this too), but at
> least the implementation isn't limited to this (given configuration) and the
> draft allows for it as well (given configuration). The default of /64 seems
> still sane to me though, given no configuration.

Regardless of whatever politics of artificial scarcity aligned to
wasting 64 bits,
128s are inevitable.

> Cheers,
>
> -Markus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet



-- 
Dave Täht
worldwide bufferbloat report:
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat
And:
What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone?
https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to