On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 12:18:52PM -0000, michael.dillon@bt.com wrote:
Many entities will have no use for the /56 you're planning on giving them.
In general, I agree with those who oppose this proposal. But another problem with the proposal is that it will lead many organizations to design their IPv6 network based on a /56 rather than a /48 which is more normal. Organizations really should think about how they structure their IPv6 network and only squeeze it into a /56 if they need to.
--Michael Dillon
"normal" is a very odd way to couch this argument. why not /35 & /32, or the /56 & /64... pragmatically, a network operator would be working in the /88 to /110 space. the massive waste in delegated and unused/unusable space is almost entirely the result of protocol designers who had little or no network operational experience. IPv6 - 96 more bits, No Magic. --bill