Re: problem configuring squeeze
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> writes:
> On Mon, 16 May 2011, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> I don't think that will be much of a problem, given that you probably
>> have full control over the vserver network. Routing on longer prefixes
>> than /64 work just fine, and there are many advocating using /126 or
>> /127 for point to point links.
>
> /126 is fine. /127 is not really a good idea beacause of DAD, and it is
> not like using /126 instead of /127 is going to waste too much valuable
> address space (unlike /31 versus /30 in IPv4).
No, waste is not an argument. The main argument for both /127 and
/126 is to avoid having unused addresses on a link. But /126 will still
leave one adress, which is why some prefers /127 instead. Although this
does mean that you have to ignore the router anycast address.
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3627
Well, that's one informational opinion. There's also the recent
standards track opinion: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6164
The nice thing about standards is that there's so many of them :-)
Bjørn
Reply to: