> On Dec 28, 2017, at 10:34 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> > wrote: > > This may be useful: > > https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-690/ > > Regards, > Jordi > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: NANOG <nanog-boun...@nanog.org> en nombre de Octavio Alvarez > <octalna...@alvarezp.org> > Responder a: <octalna...@alvarezp.org> > Fecha: jueves, 28 de diciembre de 2017, 19:31 > Para: Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> > CC: <nanog@nanog.org> > Asunto: Re: Assigning /64 but using /127 (was Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too) > > On 12/28/2017 11:39 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> >>> On Dec 28, 2017, at 09:23 , Octavio Alvarez <octalna...@alvarezp.org> wrote: >>> >>> On 12/20/2017 12:23 PM, Mike wrote: >>>> On 12/17/2017 08:31 PM, Eric Kuhnke wrote: >>>> Call this the 'shavings', in IPv4 for example, when you assign a P2P >>>> link with a /30, you are using 2 and wasting 2 addresses. But in IPv6, >>>> due to ping-pong and just so many technical manuals and other advices, >>>> you are told to "just use a /64' for your point to points. >>> >>> Isn't it a /127 nowadays, per RFC 6547 and RFC 6164? I guess the >>> exception would be if a router does not support it. >>> >> Best practice used most places is to assign a /64 and put a /127 on the >> interfaces. >> > > Thanks for the info. Is this documented somewhere? Is there a > disadvantage in letting many P2P links use different /127 networks > within the same /64?
Primarily human factors. Owen > > Best regards, > Octavio. > > > > > ********************************************** > IPv4 is over > Are you ready for the new Internet ? > http://www.consulintel.es > The IPv6 Company > > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or > confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the > individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, > copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if > partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be > considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware > that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this > information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly > prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the > original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. > >
