
nanog mailing list archives
Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 03:09:11 -0800
On Jan 27, 2010, at 2:38 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
The general intent of the /48 allocation is that it is large enough for nearly everybody, with nearly everybody including all but the largest of organisations.the general intent of a class B allocation is that it is large enough for nearly everybody, with nearly everybody including all but the largest of organisations. hmmmmm randy
That would, indeed, work if we weren't short of class B networks to assign. Owen
Current thread:
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links, (continued)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Kevin Oberman (Jan 25)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Mark Smith (Jan 25)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Jim Burwell (Jan 25)
- RE: Using /126 for IPv6 router links TJ (Jan 26)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Tim Durack (Jan 26)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Mark Smith (Jan 26)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Christopher Morrow (Jan 26)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Mark Smith (Jan 26)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Mark Andrews (Jan 26)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Randy Bush (Jan 27)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Owen DeLong (Jan 27)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Mark Smith (Jan 27)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Mark Smith (Jan 27)
- Message not available
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Randy Bush (Jan 27)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Mark Andrews (Jan 27)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Mark Smith (Jan 27)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Nathan Ward (Jan 27)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Larry Sheldon (Jan 27)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Owen DeLong (Jan 25)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Tim Durack (Jan 25)
- Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links Christopher Morrow (Jan 25)