On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Jeroen Massar <jer...@massar.ch> wrote:
> On 2014-06-17 22:36, Grzegorz Janoszka wrote: > > On 2014-06-17 22:13, David Conrad wrote: > >> On Jun 17, 2014, at 12:55 PM, Grzegorz Janoszka <grzeg...@janoszka.pl> > >> wrote: > >>> There are still applications that break with subnet smaller than /64, > >>> so all VPS providers probably have to use /64 addressing. > >> > >> Wouldn't that argue for /64s? > > > > /64 netmask, but not /64 for a customer. There are application which > > break if provided with /80 or /120, but I am not aware of an application > > requesting /64 for itself. > > Except for SLAAC that requires a /64 due to it using EUI-48 to make up > the address, which "applications" are these, as those applications are > broken by design. > > An application (unless it is a protocol like SLAAC or something else > similarly low-level) does not need to know about prefix sizes nor > routing tables. > > Thus, can you please identify these applications so that we can hammer > on the developers of those applications and fix that problem? > I tried to configure my FreeBSD box at home to use a /120 subnet mask. It consistently crashed with a kernel panic. I eventually gave up and just configured it with a /64. Not really an application per se, but since the OS died, I couldn't actually tell if the applications were happy or not. :( Matt
