On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Harald Koch <c...@pobox.com> wrote: > On 9 July 2015 at 11:42, Matthew Huff <mh...@ox.com> wrote: > >> What am I missing? Is it just the splitting on the sextet boundary that is >> an issue, or do people think people really need 64k subnets per household?
It is wasting that /64 on each separate media, lan type, or security model. >> > > One thing you're missing is that some of these new-fangled uses for IP > networking will want to do their own subnetting. It's not "here's a subnet > for the car", it's "here's a /56 for the car to break into smaller pieces > as required". > > A /56 isn't 256 subnets, it's 8 levels of subnetting (or 2 levels, if > you're human and want to subnet at nibble boundaries). A /48 is 16 (or 4) > levels. I have four vehicles, so I'd want to carve out a /52 for "the car > network" to make the routing and security easier to manage, and leave room > for expansion (or for my guests...) > > One more consideration for you: we're currently allocating all IPv6 > addresses out of 2000::/3. That's 1/8th of the space available. If we > discover we've messed up with this sparse address allocation idea, we have > 7/8ths of the remaining space left to do something different. And the colonists of Alpha Centauri will curse our shortsightedness. > -- > Harald -- Dave Täht worldwide bufferbloat report: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat And: What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone? https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast
