Subject: RE: Is /32 enough? (was Re: Patrick Faltstrom...)

From: "Michel Py" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 10:01:42 -0700

Tim,

>> I would find it very neat if an ISP requested say a /22 btw :)

> Tim Chown wrote:
> The bigger mobile operators have 10M+ customers... so
> maybe not that far off :)

Keep in mind though that a /64 is plenty for a cell phone; I've never
seen one that had internal subnetting...

Michel.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Tim Chown <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 18:15:31 +0100

> seen one that had internal subnetting...

At present I agree, with higher bandwidth and lower cost maybe not?  Why
would a DSL customer be a site and a UMTS customer not?

But many big ISPs have more than 500K customers regardless, mobile operators
are just one case.

Tim

---

From: Markku Savela <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 20:19:07 +0300

> seen one that had internal subnetting...

But, it will do if a cell phone is acting as an internet gateway for a
small bluetooth ad hoc network.

With only /64, and with the limitation that prefix cannot be longer
than 64, the phone cannot subnet the /64 forwards. Thus, there needs
to be some funny non-standard bridging logic in the phone (multilink
subnets or what they were...)

Of course, the bluetooth link layer could be defined to use id length
of 56bits (/72) and phone could then subnet it's given /64? :-)