Re: Assigning IPv6 /48's to CPE's?

2008-01-01 Thread James Hess
On Dec 31, 2007 3:26 PM, Church, Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > like a natural choice, leaving 80 bits for network addressing. This > waste of space seems vaguely familiar to handing out Class A netblocks > 20+ years ago. "We'll never run out"... Maybe it's just me though. The compariso

Re: Assigning IPv6 /48's to CPE's?

2008-01-01 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Jan 1, 2008 12:46 PM, James Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The place where major problems could be run into is deciding how big a > block your ISPs and > LIRs get, or if the registries are entertaining the concept of PI > space for v6.. how large too late NRO policy comparison chart: htt

Re: v6 subnet size for DSL & leased line customers

2008-01-01 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Jan 1, 2008 8:29 AM, Mark Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 1 Jan 2008 12:57:17 +0100 > Iljitsch van Beijnum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On 31 dec 2007, at 1:24, Mark Smith wrote: > > > > > Another idea would be to give each non-/48 customer the > > > first /56 out of each /

Re: Assigning IPv6 /48's to CPE's?

2008-01-01 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Jan 2, 2008 12:35 AM, Christopher Morrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 1, 2008 12:46 PM, James Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The place where major problems could be run into is deciding how big a > > block your ISPs and > > LIRs get, or if the registries are entertaining the conce