On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 07:49 +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > Sorry, I don't see why /56 is qualitatively different to a /60.
> Because more is more, and it makes it less likely that people will start > to invent silly solutions to problems that do not really exist. With a > /56, I can't really imagine this being not enough for 99.9% of households > in 10 years, whereas I CAN imagine a household that needs more than 16 > subnetworks, plus the PD model described in an earlier email makes a /56 > more suited for chaining. OK, I'm convinced :-) Thanks, K. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Karl Auer (ka...@biplane.com.au) +61-2-64957160 (h) http://www.biplane.com.au/~kauer/ +61-428-957160 (mob) GPG fingerprint: 07F3 1DF9 9D45 8BCD 7DD5 00CE 4A44 6A03 F43A 7DEF
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
