On Jan 6, 2011, at 8:58 PM, Jima wrote:
On 1/6/2011 4:47 PM, Grant Phillips wrote:
I acknowledge and see the point made. There is a lot of dead space in the IPv6 world. Are we allowing history to repeat it self? Well i'm swaying more to no.
Have you read this RFC? This is pretty satisfying in making me feel more comfortable assigning out /48 and /64's. I can sleep at night now! :P
I can't tell if you're trolling, or if you didn't get the memo from Monday. I guess I'll lean toward the latter.
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/current/msg06820.html
Jima
That's a draft, and, it doesn't really eliminate the idea that /48s are generally a good thing so much as it recognizes that there might be SOME circumstances in which they are either not necessary or insufficient. As a draft, it hasn't been through the full process and shouldn't be considered to have the same weight as an RFC. While it intends to obsolete RFC-3177, it doesn't obsolete it yet and, indeed, may never do so. Owen