[ppml] tossed over the wall...

[Thomas Narten]

"Home Business Services, Inc." <don.wilder at gmail.com> writes:

> On 7/12/05, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com <bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com> wrote:
> >  /56 anyone?
> > 
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-narten-ipv6-3177bis-48boundary-00.txt

> I wonder if there isn't a typo on page 3...

>       - home user - expected to have a small number of subnets, e.g.,
>         less than 10 - a /56 assignment

>       - small business/organization  - one having a small number of
>         networks, e.g., less than 100  - a /56 assignment

>       - large business/organization - an organization having more than
>         100 subnets - a /48.

> One would think that there was a logical progression... /56, /52,
>  /48

In an earlier version, I had toyed with having a /60 for home sites,
and a /56 for small businesses, etc. The above wording stems from
that.

I'm just not sure that having more than three sizes (i..e, /48, /56,
/64) is necessary. It may just be diminishing returns... Moving from
/48 to /56 for a large percentage of the allocations would reap such a
lot of benefit (2 orders of magnitude) that I don't know that trying
for more is really necessary.

> I for one would love a /56 for my home business.

Indeed, that's 256 subnets. That's really a lot!

Thomas