I am not checking my emails until Nov 14th, 2025. Thanks, Samaneh On Nov 6, 2025, at 7:27 AM, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG <nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote: I do not understand what you are talking about. IPv6 is mostly using SLAAC. SLAAC is 64 bit addressing architecture. (by the way, 64 bit is enough for addressing of everything) Even if somebody use DHCP, he typically makes subnet "SLAAC compatible", it means: use 64 bits for addressing. Eduard -----Original Message----- From: Marco Moock via NANOG <nanog@lists.nanog.org> Sent: Wednesday, November 5, 2025 17:35 To: North American Network Operators Group <nanog@lists.nanog.org> Cc: Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> Subject: Re: Artificial Juniper SRX limitations preventing IPv6 deployment (and sales) Am 05.11.2025 um 13:03:46 Uhr schrieb Vasilenko Eduard: Are you aware that EUI64 is only one way to generate the addresses and that the 64 bits can be randomly filled or be static? Do you mean that random garbage (for privacy) did return 2% resources to the Internet? These 16 bytes (8 for source and 8 for destination) are still used not for IP addressing. Does it matter for what it is used, if it is not IP addressing? IPv6 is 64+bit architecture (a few bits are used inside subnet) I do not understand what you are talking about. For IPv6, the subnets that are connected to links should always be /64. Various ways exist to fill the other 64 bit. If you want NAT really hard, you can use it with IPv6 too. fd00::/8 exist. Then it is better to use NTP. But IETF makes everything possible to block it too. Anyway, if NAT (in any form) is blocked then there is no practical solution for ISP redundancy: There is and I pointed that out. The NAT "redundancy" "solutions" do not offer redundancy. They are a cripple solution. -- Gruß Marco Send unsolicited bulk mail to 1762344226muell@cartoonies.org _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@list... [lists[.]nanog[.]org]