[00:57] *** bob^^ has quit IRC (Read error: No route to host) [00:57] *** bob^^ has joined #arpnetworks [01:02] *** LT has joined #arpnetworks [01:32] *** nerdd_ has joined #arpnetworks [01:34] *** nerdd has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) [02:12] *** ivan-kanis has joined #arpnetworks [03:59] *** a_j__c has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) [04:08] *** a_j__c has joined #arpnetworks [04:08] *** a_j__c has quit IRC (Changing host) [04:08] *** a_j__c has joined #arpnetworks [04:48] *** ivan-kanis has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection) [05:49] *** chess has quit IRC (Quit: Darkness shrugs and bids the day goodbye) [06:15] *** phreak has quit IRC (Quit: sleep) [07:25] *** cmeiklejohn has joined #arpnetworks [07:53] *** robotarmy has joined #arpnetworks [07:54] *** Jason_Wood has joined #arpnetworks [08:11] *** d^_^b has quit IRC (Quit: Lost terminal) [08:12] *** ivan-kanis has joined #arpnetworks [08:36] *** heavysixer has quit IRC (Quit: BAMPF!) [08:36] *** robotarmy has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection) [08:47] *** LT has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving) [09:08] *** ivan-kanis has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection) [09:26] *** HighJinx has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving) [09:49] *** cubelogic has joined #arpnetworks [10:44] *** HighJinx has joined #arpnetworks [10:45] *** mattx86 has joined #arpnetworks [10:48] up_the_irons - http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/bcp/bcp157.txt [10:48] ipv6 address assignment recommendations [10:48] recently updated [10:49] Interesting. [10:49] backing off on the /48 rule [10:49] but firm on /64 per segment [10:49] and saying "no more /128 please" [10:49] Makes sense. [10:49] I'd think a place like arp would hand out /56 [10:50] as a happy compromise between /48 and /64 [10:50] still plenty-o-nets :) [11:00] Yeah I think I'm using 1 address. Heh. [11:05] I'd like it if people would agree on a max routable prefix-length for v6 [11:05] preferrably something longer than a /32 [11:17] RandalSchwartz: the /48 vs /56 debate has gone on a long time; i still think making the differentiation between "well, this is a 'big' customer, give him more IPv6 space (/48); and this is a 'small' customer, give him less IPv6 space (/56)", is still IPv4-centric thinking [11:18] if we do, /32 - ISP, /48 - Customer of ISP, /64 - subnet of customer of ISP, we get a *lot* simpler addressing schemes and simple means less errors and therefore less costly [11:20] I think the purpose of that recent memo though is to not bake those numbers into code, in case the assumption is false [11:20] (except for /64) [11:20] and also to deprecate /128 [11:22] yeah, i never bought into /128 [11:23] just saw that comment about a fear of going back to classful addressing [11:23] i dunno, in the end, that's not much of a case alone; but i'll read the whole thing and then decide [11:26] it also bugs me a little that a /56 doesn't end on a ":" boundary ;) [11:27] true [11:27] " For example, a large business (which may have thousands of employees) [11:27] would, by default, receive the same amount of address space as a home [11:27] user, who today typically has a single (or small number of) LAN and a [11:27] small number of devices (dozens or less). " [11:27] i can see the logic here [11:28] :D [11:28] * up_the_irons thinks [11:28] yeah, i can respect the /56 a little more [11:29] but it begs the question -- in an IPv6 world, does that distinction actually matter? does the term "waste" even apply anymore? [11:44] geez, i still can't grasp the concept of /24 /48... etc [12:46] *** CRowen has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer) [12:49] *** CRowen has joined #arpnetworks [13:13] *** heavysixer has joined #arpnetworks [13:13] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o heavysixer [13:13] *** heavysixer has quit IRC (Client Quit) [13:13] *** heavysixer has joined #arpnetworks [13:13] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o heavysixer [13:29] *** phreak has joined #arpnetworks [13:53] *** fink has joined #arpnetworks [13:56] *** a_j__c has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer) [13:56] *** a_j__c has joined #arpnetworks [13:56] *** a_j__c has quit IRC (Changing host) [13:56] *** a_j__c has joined #arpnetworks [15:22] *** mtve has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) [15:29] *** HighJinx has quit IRC (*.net *.split) [15:45] *** HighJinx has joined #arpnetworks [16:00] *** d^_^b has joined #arpnetworks [17:32] *** mtve has joined #arpnetworks [18:22] *** cubelogic has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) [18:31] *** heavysixer has quit IRC (Quit: BAMPF!) [18:36] *** fink has quit IRC (Quit: fink) [18:46] *** HighJinx has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) [19:08] *** DDevine has quit IRC (Quit: leaving) [19:20] *** ziyourenxiang has joined #arpnetworks [19:45] *** ziyourenxiang has quit IRC (Quit: ziyourenxiang) [20:31] up_the_irons: my view is, for commercial ISPs (not hosting providers) the default for home customers should be /56 [20:38] up_the_irons: my rationale, is that customers generally don't need to subnet or anything funny like that, the max the average home user needs is 2 (depending on deployment, you'd have the home network, + the link to the ISP being the second), it's only crazy people like me, that have subnetted their home network into about 5 different subnets [20:43] *** jkhii has joined #arpnetworks [21:43] *** robotarmy has joined #arpnetworks [22:17] *** CRowen has quit IRC (Quit: changing servers) [22:20] *** CRowen has joined #arpnetworks [22:31] *** jaja has joined #arpnetworks [22:31] hi [22:38] up_the_irons here? [22:44] *** HighJinx has joined #arpnetworks [22:46] *** HighJinx has quit IRC (Client Quit) [22:48] *** HighJinx has joined #arpnetworks [22:49] * HighJinx drops a pin on up_the_irons, just cause