[lacnog] [afnog] IPv 6 Point to Point at /64?

[Arturo Servin]

	Good points!

	/64 is very convenient that fits all, but also may have some security issues. 112 does not sound bad at all.

Cheers
.as	


On 6 Jun 2012, at 18:40, Sascha E. Pollok wrote:

> For many years -be it good or bad but it was quite convenient- we have been using /112 for all types of "transfer"(tm) networks. It leaves enough room for setting up more than 2-4 hosts in case of VRRPv6 or HSRPv6 or
> Anycast setups (in case of a customer connected to redundant PE routers).
> 
> Yes, one could argue that a /124 could be enough too but a /126 is a bit
> too small. Size does matter sometimes!
> 
> Going /112 for all cases of transfer-networks gives room for some flexibility.
> 
> -Sascha
> 
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2012, Arturo Servin wrote:
> 
>> Muchos creemos que un /126 es suficiente, pero no todos creemos que sea lo más conveniente.
>> =D
>> /as
>> On 5 Jun 2012, at 18:24, Nicolas Antoniello wrote:
>> 
>>      Me es grato saber que no estoy solo en la creencia de que un /126 es
>>      suficiente para una PtP !!!
> _______________________________________________
> LACNOG mailing list
> LACNOG en lacnic.net
> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog