On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 11:06 PM, Mark Smith <na...@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org> wrote: > On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:15:55 -0500 > "TJ" <trej...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I didn't realize "human friendly" was even a nominal design consideration, >> especially as different humans have different tolerances for defining >> "friendly" :) >> > > This from people who can probably do decimal to binary conversion > and back again for IPv4 subnetting in their head and are proud of > it. Surely IPv6 hex to binary and back again can be the new party > trick? :-) Maybe we can all do this stuff in our head, but I have found removing unnecessary thinking from the equation is useful for those "3am" moments. Given that I am assigning a /48 to a site anyway, and 65k /64s is "more than I will ever need", does it really matter if the site-specific numbering plan isn't ruthlessly efficient? -- Tim:> Sent from Brooklyn, NY, United States
