> (The whole reason why /64 semeed a good idea back then was CGA and > "we can make it work with EUI-64 on IEEE-1394 devices!", of which CGA > never truly happened, EUI-64 based on MAC addresses is dying off, and > IEEE-1394 is long gone... I always thought that /64 was a bit silly) Maybe, but this large address space, give you the room for all these ideas (and a lot more like 8+8 etc.). I think the great benefit and the main driver was (and is) the full automated address configuration. Holger
- Realistic number of hosts for a /64 subnet? Doug Barton
- Re: Realistic number of hosts for a /64 subnet? Mark Tinka
- Re: Realistic number of hosts for a /64 subne... Gert Doering
- Re: Realistic number of hosts for a /64 s... H.Zuleger
- Re: Realistic number of hosts for a /... Gert Doering
- Re: Realistic number of hosts fo... Yannis Nikolopoulos
- Re: Realistic number of hosts for a /64 subne... Joe Hamelin
- Re: Realistic number of hosts for a /64 s... Bernd Walter
- Re: Realistic number of hosts for a /64 subnet? Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: Realistic number of hosts for a /64 subnet? Ole Troan
- Re: Realistic number of hosts for a /64 subnet? Nick Hilliard
- Re: Realistic number of hosts for a /64 subne... Gert Doering
- Re: Realistic number of hosts for a /64 s... Nick Hilliard
