[sig-ipv6] BOUNCE sig-ipv6@lists.apnic.net: Non-member submission from ["Matt Crawford" <crawdad@fnal.gov>]

[owner-sig-ipv6@lists.apnic.net]

>From owner-sig-ipv6  Tue Jul 11 00:29:28 2000
Received: from gungnir.fnal.gov (gungnir.fnal.gov [131.225.80.1])
	by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA90950
	for <sig-ipv6@apnic.net>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 00:29:26 +1000 (EST)
Received: from gungnir.fnal.gov (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by gungnir.fnal.gov (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA25294;
	Mon, 10 Jul 2000 09:28:38 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <200007101428.JAA25294@gungnir.fnal.gov>
To: Heikki.Waris@nokia.com
Cc: ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com, ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com, sig-ipv6@apnic.net
From: "Matt Crawford" <crawdad@fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: (ngtrans) Fw: [apnic-announce] IPv6 Policy Document Revision 
In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 10 Jul 2000 13:43:25 +0300.
             <01D91AFB08B6D211BFD00008C7EABAE1021673D3@eseis04nok> 
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 09:28:38 -0500
Sender: crawdad@gungnir.fnal.gov

> So we need 2*10^12 subnets just for currently foreseeable uses. Or in terms
> of address space, consumption of 41 bits. If we leave out the 3 bit format
> prefix, this leaves us with 20 bits to waste (if subnets are /64). If the
> default subnet is /48, we only have 4 bits to waste. And that's not much.

Point 1: Subnets (under format prefix 001 binary) *are* 64 bits, not
48.  That is not under any sort of argument by anyone, as far as I
know.  The question the registries are trying to open is how many
subnets get assigned in a block to a "site".

Point 2: You've already built in a 90% "waste" into your numbers, so
saying that you are left with "only n bits to waste" is pure deception.

					Matt Crawford

*              sig-ipv6:  APNIC SIG on IPv6 technology and policy issues           *
* To unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe" to sig-ipv6-request@apnic.net *