sounds just like folks in 1985, talking about IPv4...
/bill On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 06:45:02AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote: > Each site should get at least a /48. > > Stop worrying about dense-packing the IP space in IPv6. This is IPv4-think. > IPv6 is intended to be sparsely allocated. > > Owen > > On Sep 24, 2013, at 8:10 PM, Nathanael C. Cariaga <nccari...@stluke.com.ph> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I raised actually this concern during our IP resource application. > > > > On a personal note, I think /48 IPv6 allocation is more than enough for our > > organization to use for at least the next 5-10 years assuming that this can > > be farmed out to our multiple sites. What makes this complicated for us is > > that we are operating on a multiple sites (geographically) with each site > > is doing multi-homing and having a /48 in each site would be very big waste > > of IP resources. > > > > -nathan > > > > On 9/25/2013 2:36 AM, Bryan Socha wrote: > >> Everyone is following the same policies. a /48 PER SITE. did you > >> request enough addresses from your RIR? > >> > >> Bryan Socha > >> > > > >
