In article <CAPTMOt+N6d+0Ucsf_9iNSDmZ8i741eLMtNnYvy-WW_dKLW2xZg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> you write: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >Fernando Gont had said: > >>No. RFC7217 simply says that the algorithm works with any IID lengths. >>But it doesn't cahnge the requirement of /64 for SLAAC. > >Well, my only intention was to show that assignment of 64 bits IP addresses >per subnet is wasteful. It might be, but since there is no chance whatsoever that the IPv6 address size will change, why are we even arguing about it? As others have noted, the large addresses make it easier to configure IPv6 networks, and to leave plenty of slack so if the network grows, you won't have to renumber or reconfigure. R's, John
