In message <56157950.5040...@lugosys.com>, "Israel G. Lugo" writes: > > On 10/03/2015 08:40 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > So a /48 isnât about being able to support 295,147,905,179,352,825,856 > > devic > es in every home, itâs about being able to have 16 bits of subnet mask to > use > in delegating addresses in a dynamic plug-and-play hierarchical topology that > can evolve on demand without user configuration or intervention. > > Which is IMO scarcely enough to be as flexible as IPv6 is being touted. > I've always considered 16 bits of subnetting way too small for an end > site. Especially if you want to do things like dynamic plug-and-play > hierarchical topology. Just following Robin Johansson's example in > another email:
Which is why "homenet" routers don't do that. They just get the prefixes they need now and route them within the site. If they need a additional prefix they ask for it when they needed it. 65000 routes is not a lot of routes for even the smallest of routers to handle. Mark > On 10/02/2015 07:08 PM, Robin Johansson wrote: > > If a /48 is assigned to each customer, then the first wireless router > > gets a /52, second router a /56 and there is room to connect one more > > level of devices. All works out of the box, everyone is happy, no > > support calls. > > We only have up to 3 levels, and each level only supports 16 branches. > May be fine for mom and dad now, but certainly not for other complex > cases. And when you start factoring the whole "soup cans with IPv6" thing... > > I still think IPv6 should've been at least 192 bits long. > > Israel G. Lugo -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org