ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 128 bits should be enough for everyone, was: IPv6 vs. Stupid NAT tricks: false dichotomy? (Was: Re: Stupid NAT tricks and how to stop them.)

2006-03-29 14:05:52
On 29-mrt-2006, at 20:45, Anthony G. Atkielski wrote:

I suspect even arrogant engineers can get it right in 8 tries.

They haven't gotten it right in the past century, so I'm not
optimistic about the future.

So how big would you like addresses to be, then?

We currently have 1/8th of the IPv6 address space set aside for global unicast purposes with the idea that ISPs give their customers / 48 blocks. That gives us 45 bits worth of address space to use up. It's generally accepted that an HD ratio of 80% should be reachable without trouble, which means we get to waste 20% of those bits in aggregation hierarchies. This gives us 36 bits = 68 billion /48s. That's several per person inhabiting the earth, and each of those / 48s provides 65536 subnets that have room to address every MAC address ever assigned without breaking a sweat.

What was the problem again?

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>