<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Me encontre esto:</div><div><br></div><div>b. Point-to-point links should be allocated a /64 and configured with a /126 or <br>/127<br></div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>De:</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://www.ipbcop.org/ratified-bcops/bcop-ipv6-subnetting/">http://www.ipbcop.org/ratified-bcops/bcop-ipv6-subnetting/</a></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Pero me gusto lo del 112.</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span></div><div>Slds</div><div>as</div><br><div><div>On 6 Jun 2012, at 21:08, Arturo Servin wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>On 6 Jun 2012, at 21:01, Fernando Gont wrote:<br><br><blockquote type="cite">Hi, Arturo,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">On 06/06/2012 07:11 PM, Arturo Servin wrote:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Sorry, we agree to disagree. I do not buy the waste of IPv6 addresses<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">argument. <br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Well, it *is* a waste of addresses if you have 2^^64 addresses<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">available, but you already know (from starters) that you'll only use at<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">most a handful of them.<br></blockquote><br><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>I do not say that it is not a waste, I say that I do not buy the argument because we are already wasting addresses with SLAAC. So why bother with a hundreds of thousands p2p links if we are wasting millions in multiaccess networks. If we were really worried about waste, we were fixing SLAAC.<br><br><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">If it were, we should start reviewing SLAAC.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">We probably should. :-) For instance, traditional SLAAC (embedding the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">MAC address) is a bad idea.... And mechanisms such as<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses or RFC 4941 could be easily<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">adapted to non-/64 prefixes (although the larger the subnet space, the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">higher the resulting "unpredictability")<br></blockquote><br><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>For example.<br><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><br><br><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">The real problem with /64 IMHO is security; <br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">The security problems with /64s do not really have to do with the /64s<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">themselves, but rather with buggy Neighbor Discovery implementations<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">that are dumb enough to not enforce limits on the number of entries in<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the Neighbor Cache, and that fail to implement appropriate garbage<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">collection for the Neighbor Cache.<br></blockquote><br><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Yes, it is.<br><br><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Cheers,<br></blockquote><br><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Today is IPv6 World Launch, and we agree!! We should have more!<br><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><br><blockquote type="cite">-- <br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Fernando Gont<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">SI6 Networks<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">e-mail: <a href="mailto:fgont@si6networks.com">fgont@si6networks.com</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><br>Cheers!<br>as<br><br><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><br>_______________________________________________<br>LACNOG mailing list<br><a href="mailto:LACNOG@lacnic.net">LACNOG@lacnic.net</a><br>https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog<br></div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>