On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 11:41:01 +1030, Matthew Moyle-Croft
wrote:
> And ARP tables are propogated around networks? No, they're local to a
> router.
I don't think there's any need for the ISP's routers to advertise all the
prefixes they delegate. They'll advertise the /48 or whatever it is, and
On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 11:08:44 +1030, Matthew Moyle-Croft
wrote:
>
> Let's face it - the current v6 assignment rules are to solve a 1990s set
> of problems. A /64 isn't needed now that we have DHCP(v6).
It's needed to prevent people from NATing in v6, as they'll still want
their stuff behind a fi
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 15:56:44 -0800, Scott Howard wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 9:30 PM,
> Anthony Roberts wrote:
>
>> It has been my experience that when you give someone a huge address
space
>> to play with (eg 10/8), they start doing things like using bits in the
&g
> Let's face it - they're going to have to come up with much more creative
> $200/hour chucklehead consultants to burn through that much anytime soon.
It has been my experience that when you give someone a huge address space
to play with (eg 10/8), they start doing things like using bits in the
ad
4 matches
Mail list logo
