On 2June2013Sunday, at 15:51, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 03/06/2013 10:31, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
>> The kind of painfully obvious solution, especially when we consider the
>> effects of the much-ballyhooed "Internet of Things," is that we have to
>> allow for prefixes > /64.
>>
>> It's not just home nets. What about automobile nets, or more generically,
>> "vehicle nets"? Are we going to try to rationalize why every vehicle on the
>> road, sea, or sky should also be given a /48,
>
> Why is this an issue, since there are 15 trillion of them available?
>
> Yes, of course I know about H ratios, but deploying a few billion /48s
> under some thousands of PA prefixes is well within a prudent policy.
>
> Brian
and operationally, there is no problem whatsoever with all that extra
'dark space" being advertised - makes a fine environment for DDoS launches.
/48's are a horrible policy - one should only advertise what one is
actually using.
/bill
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
