On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:49:00 AM Teerapatr
Kittiratanachai wrote:
> Dear Jens and Mark,
>
> Is there any benefit to assign /112 mask ?
When it comes to IP addresses, personally, I differ from
most by being a little conservative, even with IPv6.
But technically, nothing I've seen so far
On 18 Jun 2014, at 10:49, Teerapatr Kittiratanachai
wrote:
> Dear Jens and Mark,
>
> Is there any benefit to assign /112 mask ?
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-why64-01
tim
>
> --Te
>
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
>> On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 09:46:14 A
Dear Jens and Mark,
Is there any benefit to assign /112 mask ?
--Te
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 09:46:14 AM Jens Link wrote:
>
>> It's always good to have more than one IP per server,
>> this way you run multiple Servers per IP (e.g. DNS or
>
Hi Eric and list,
> I wonder why you would like to do that rather than asking for a /60 at
> your ISP though :-)
unfortunately there are ISPs and hosters who simply don't get it.
In some cases they haven't yet managed to get this idea out of their
minds that IP addresses are a scarce resource
On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 09:46:14 AM Jens Link wrote:
> It's always good to have more than one IP per server,
> this way you run multiple Servers per IP (e.g. DNS or
> HTTP). This might get a little dirty but sometimes it
> necessary. For internal Server I would go with a /64 or
> maybe a /112.
"Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" writes:
> If you have one server per LAN, then it is perfectly OK to use one /
> 64 per server. If you think about that, currently you use a /32 for
> IPv4 address :-) You are currently wasting more space (4 billion
> times more)
I think that depends on what kind of serve
Hi,
> This is TB is just a government organization which was established to
> study/develop in field of technology.
> And TB is one of some services that still be in implement phase.
Ah, so there is still time to fix things :) One of the great things of IPv6 is
that addresses are plentiful. Esp
Dear Eric,
Great idea, thanks.
Dear Sander,
This is TB is just a government organization which was established to
study/develop in field of technology.
And TB is one of some services that still be in implement phase.
--Te
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Sander Steffann wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Sor
Hi,
> Sorry for my mistake, I should write Tunnel Broker instead of ISP.
> Due to the ISPs doesn't deploy the IPv6 yet, so I have to access via TB.
> And some TB doesn't provide a lot of IPv6 address.
Every IPv6 tunnel broker I know gives you a /48, which is 65536 /64s. Can you
please let me kno
lementations may (rightfully) complain. But you have decent chance
> that it works
>
> -éric
>
> From: Teerapatr Kittiratanachai
> Date: mercredi 18 juin 2014 08:30
> To: Eric Vyncke
> Cc: "ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de"
> Subject: Re: IPv6 Assignment for Server
>
&
sts.cluenet.de>>
Subject: Re: IPv6 Assignment for Server
Thank you, I forgot to think about NS and NA.
One more question, If I got the /64 mask from ISP and implement as below.
Theoretically, is it work?
Normal Situation: work fine
IPv6 Internet - ISP (2001:db8:a:1::1/64) -
c
>
> From: Teerapatr Kittiratanachai
> Date: mercredi 18 juin 2014 05:28
> To: "ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de"
> Subject: IPv6 Assignment for Server
>
>Dear IPv6-Ops,
>
> I want the suggestion about the best practice for assign IPv6 Global
> Unicast a
...@gmail.com>>
Date: mercredi 18 juin 2014 05:28
To: "ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de<mailto:ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de>"
mailto:ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de>>
Subject: IPv6 Assignment for Server
Dear IPv6-Ops,
I want the suggestion about the best practice for assign IPv6 Global Unicast
a
Dear IPv6-Ops,
I want the suggestion about the best practice for assign IPv6 Global
Unicast address for server.
According to the IPv6 Subnet ID also be built in with IPv6 address, so if I
assign the /64 mask to the server is it will be some of wasteful usage?
AFAIK, the /64 mask address can be bro
14 matches
Mail list logo
