On Fri, 17 Aug 2007, michael.dillon@xxxxxx wrote: <snip> > LIR's may assign blocks in the range of /48 to /64 to end sites. > All assignments made by LIR's should meet a minimum HD-Ratio of .25. > > * /64 - Site needing only a single subnet. > * /60 - Site with 2-3 subnets initially. > * /56 - Site with 4-7 subnets initially. > * /52 - Site with 8-15 subnets initially. > * /48 - Site with 16+ subnets initially. On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Jeroen Massar wrote: <snip> > > * currently, which is why the /56 thing has come up again, which IMHO > might be a good idea as a /48 is an awful lot that I won't even use at > home, though a /48 for every end-site is fine by me as it currently is too. I would say this entire problem is related to the fact that a /48 is a huge amount of IP addresses and most people have a hard time to understand why everyone, even end-users (your grandmother or any other non-technical users) should get this amount. And at the same time it is expected that most businesses and companys should get the same size. This is just asking for trouble because it is just not-logical at all to have a one size fits all like that. I know the reasons behind the /48 etc but it just going to cause us trouble to keep it like that, we should divide the /48 cateogry of users into two: - people that can get the current /48 as long as they have more than ONE subnet - people that only have ONE subnet, typical home-users (end-users, including your grandmother), they should get a /56 or whatever else bigger than /60 and smaller than /48. Whatever else criteria we are might use should be possible to formulate into one sentence, that simple. -- Roger Jorgensen | rogerj@xxxxxxxxx | - IPv6 is The Key! http://www.jorgensen.no | roger@xxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf