On Aug 10, 2011 7:45 PM, "Mark Newton" <newton@internode.com.au> wrote:
On 11/08/2011, at 8:42 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
I suppose that limiting enough households to too small an allocation will have that effect. I would rather we steer the internet deployment towards liberal enough allocations to avoid such disability for the future.
I see the lack of agreement on whether /48 or /56 or /60 is good for a home network to be a positive thing.
As long as there's no firm consensus, router vendors will have to
implement
features which don't make silly hard-coded assumptions.
Innovation will still happen, features will still be implemented, we'll still climb out of the NAT morass. But we'll do it with CPE that allows for a richer spectrum of variation than we would if we just said, "Dammit, /48 for everyone."
It's all good. At this stage of the game, any amount of "moving forward" is better than staying where we are.
(which reminds me: http://www.internode.on.net/news/2011/08/238.php It ain't that hard)
Finally a useful post in this thread. Good work on the deployment of real ipv6! Cb
- mark
-- Mark Newton Email: newton@internode.com.au(W) Network Engineer Email: newton@atdot.dotat.org (H) Internode Pty Ltd Desk: +61-8-82282999 "Network Man" - Anagram of "Mark Newton" Mobile: +61-416-202-223