Unless the SP's semantic meaning of those bits otherwise restricts how the user can use different chunks of that /48.
Owen On Jun 5, 2013, at 01:01 , [email protected] wrote: > If the SP allocates users the equivalent of a /48 divided up as multiple > >/48s with semantic meaning to each of the assigned prefixes, then the user's > got a /48, and the SP's got their semantic bits. > > Ian > > From: Lorenzo Colitti <[email protected]> > Date: Wednesday, 5 June 2013 05:42 > To: Ted Lemon <[email protected]> > Cc: Owen DeLong <[email protected]>, "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" > <[email protected]>, Ralph Droms > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than > locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03 > Resent-To: <[email protected]>, Ian Farrer <[email protected]>, > <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> > > On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Ted Lemon <[email protected]> wrote: >> So the point isn't that a /48 is a waste of space. It's that a /48 is >> assumed, and because it is assumed, there are definitely bits available for >> semantic prefix assignment. > > I still don't understand. What the above sentences seem to be saying is that > "there are bits available for semantic prefix assignment because RIRs assume > /48 but users don't actually get /48". Is that your point? > > If so, I don't see how you can also state that there are enough bits to both > give every user a /48 and to use semantic prefix bits.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
