nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred () cisco com>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 20:44:19 +0000
On Nov 1, 2012, at 8:20 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
We should better introduce partially decimal format for IPv6 addresses or, better, avoid IPv6 entirely.
With respect, it is already possible to use the decimal subset if you wish. For example, you could write 2001:dba::192:168:2:1 It wouldn't be very dense, but EID density wasn't the objective.
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Owen DeLong (Nov 01)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Tore Anderson (Nov 02)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Owen DeLong (Nov 02)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Tore Anderson (Nov 03)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Owen DeLong (Nov 03)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Tore Anderson (Nov 04)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Owen DeLong (Nov 04)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Tore Anderson (Nov 04)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Owen DeLong (Nov 04)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Tore Anderson (Nov 04)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 01)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP David Miller (Nov 01)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Owen DeLong (Nov 01)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Miquel van Smoorenburg (Nov 01)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Owen DeLong (Nov 01)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP joel jaeggli (Nov 03)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Randy (Nov 02)
- Re: IPv6 Netowrk Device Numbering BP Graham Beneke (Nov 02)