RE: Draft on Globally Unique IPv6 Local Unicast Addresses

["Michel Py" <michel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> In response to both you and Christian, I think the arguments why
> we need /48s, and can afford to give them, are in RFC 3177.
> That doesn't exclude /64 in some cases, but as a general solution,
> we should assume the need for subnets and not assume automatic
> subnet numbering.

I completely agree with this.

Michel.


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------