Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links

[Larry Sheldon]

On 1/23/2010 8:24 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2010, at 4:52 AM, Mathias Seiler wrote:
> > In reference to the discussion about /31 for router links, I d'like
> > to know what is your experience with IPv6 in this regard.
> >
> > I use a /126 if possible but have also configured one /64 just for
> > the link between two routers. This works great but when I think
> > that I'm wasting 2^64 - 2 addresses here it feels plain wrong.
> >
> > So what do you think? Good? Bad? Ugly? /127 ? ;)
> Use the /64... It's OK... IPv6 was designed with that in mind.
>
> 64 bits is enough networks that if each network was an almond M&M,
> you would be able to fill all of the great lakes with M&Ms before you
> ran out of /64s.
Did somebody once say something like that about Class C addresses?


--
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to
take everything you have."

Remember:  The Ark was built by amateurs, the Titanic by professionals.

Requiescas in pace o email
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
Eppure si rinfresca

ICBM Targeting Information:  http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml