[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

IPV6 planning

Subject: IPV6 planning
From: saku at ytti.fi (Saku Ytti)
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 01:57:54 +0200
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

On 6 March 2016 at 00:59, Karl Auer <kauer at biplane.com.au> wrote:
> Other thing with SLAAC is that you get 64-bit subnets and only 64-bit
> subnets. This should not be any kind of problem with a flat /48, but if
> you will have more complicated subnetting you should keep an eye on it.

Technically speaking there is no reason not to support SLAAC on
arbitrary size networks. I believe Cisco happily will autogenerate
address for smaller subnets.

-- 
  ++ytti

Follow-Ups:
- IPV6 planning
  - From: kauer at biplane.com.au (Karl Auer)

References:
- IPV6 planning
  - From: admin at coldnorthadmin.com (Laurent Dumont)
- IPV6 planning
  - From: kauer at biplane.com.au (Karl Auer)

Prev by Date: IPV6 planning
Next by Date: IPV6 planning
Previous by thread: IPV6 planning
Next by thread: IPV6 planning
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread