3 ms·
> My work network has a /64 for WAN (yes quite a lot of addresses for a point to point link) […] Technical footnote: /127 addresses are supported (and were a t
by throw0101a 4y ago
> My work network has a /64 for WAN (yes quite a lot of addresses for a point to point link) […]
Technical footnote: /127 addresses are supported (and were a thing for a short while) on inter-router links:
* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6164 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6164
Technical technical footnote: you can just use link-local address for inter-router links because all the router cares about is the next next-hop, and you don't need a globally routable address for that.
In an IPv6 network, it is possible to use only link-local addresses
on infrastructure links between routers. This document discusses the
advantages and disadvantages of this approach to facilitate the
decision process for a given network.
* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7404 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7404
- gerdesj 4y ago"Technical footnote: /127 addresses are supported" Yes they are but I want a shit load of stuff on my WAN available to the world and I don't want to piss around with NAT n that. The IPv6 address-space is big enough to deal with PtP links. It doesn't really matter, You could do a /127 for WAN and then I allocate a /64 from my /48 for WAN. Or you could use a recent RFC that enables a /64 or smaller to be used for WAN without a separate allocation.