Choice of network space when numbering interfaces with IPv6

[scott at doc.net.au (Scott Howard)]

http://www.google.com/search?q=nanog+126+64 would be a good place to
start...

(And I'm guessing you mean that /64 is "awfully large", not /126)

  Scott.


On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Zaid Ali <zaid at zaidali.com> wrote:

> SO I have been turning up v6 with multiple providers now and notice that
> some choose /64 for numbering interfaces but one I came across use a /126.
> A
> /126 is awfully large (for interface numbering) and I am curious if there
> is
> some rationale behind using a /126 instead of a /64.
>
> Zaid
>
>
>
>