Thomas,

>> Michel Py wrote:
>> Note about this: My reading is that there still is a
>> semi-hard boundary at /48, (site) and I think this is good.

> Thomas Narten wrote:
> If you are talking about addrarch, please point out the
> words that lead you think this. There is *no* technical
> hard boundary at /48. There is a *policy* or *allocation*
> boundary, and there are technical reasons why such a boundary
> make sense,

I was talking about the policy part, see below.

> but implementations should not have any sort of /48 boundary
> hard-wired into the code.

Agree.

> Right now, End sites can expect to get a /48,

This is what I called earlier a semi-hard boundary. Not part of the
Addressing Architecture, but assumed by many nevertheless.


> and they get use the 16 bits between a /48 and /64 anyway
> they care. If a site switches providers, it knows it will
> get 16 bits again, and it konws that it needs to (only)
> renumber the upper 48 bits. This is both simple and powerful.

Yep, and the same reasoning also applies to 6to4, so people that have
choose to use 6to4 as a short-term mechanism will also greatly benefit
from the fact that a site, although not defined in [addrarch], is also a
/48.


>> But, what I think this WG needs to think about and understand
>> is _why_ operators are using longer prefixes on their
>> router-to-router links.

> This is a key question. Just because operators are doing this,
> doesn't mean they should or that we should just give in and say
> "I guess we should give in to reality".

"Just because _some_ operators are doing it" seems more appropriate to
me. 

Especially on the 6bone, private discussions I had with them have shown
that the use of /127s is mostly a post-cidr v4 withdrawal, and most of
them would gladly renumber all their ptp links, if only they had more
time.

I agree with the rest of your postings.

Michel.


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to