On Aug 10, 2011 7:45 PM, "Mark Newton" <new...@internode.com.au> wrote: > > > On 11/08/2011, at 8:42 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > > > I suppose that limiting enough households to too small an allocation > > will have that effect. I would rather we steer the internet deployment > > towards liberal enough allocations to avoid such disability for the > > future. > > > I see the lack of agreement on whether /48 or /56 or /60 is good for a > home network to be a positive thing. > > As long as there's no firm consensus, router vendors will have to implement > features which don't make silly hard-coded assumptions. > > Innovation will still happen, features will still be implemented, we'll > still climb out of the NAT morass. But we'll do it with CPE that allows for > a richer spectrum of variation than we would if we just said, "Dammit, /48 for > everyone." > > It's all good. At this stage of the game, any amount of "moving forward" is > better than staying where we are. > > (which reminds me: http://www.internode.on.net/news/2011/08/238.php It ain't > that hard) >
Finally a useful post in this thread. Good work on the deployment of real ipv6! Cb > - mark > > -- > Mark Newton Email: new...@internode.com.au(W) > Network Engineer Email: new...@atdot.dotat.org (H) > Internode Pty Ltd Desk: +61-8-82282999 > "Network Man" - Anagram of "Mark Newton" Mobile: +61-416-202-223 > > > > > >
