RE: Why /64

+1 for the /64 on the link and /48 for enterprise, 

but "at least" a /56 for home (with /60 too tiny) ??
Can you elaborate on why you would need more than 4 bits subnets @ home?

-----Original Message-----
From: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jeroen Massar
Sent: maandag 28 oktober 2013 9:25
To: Octavio Alvarez
Cc: <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Why /64

On 2013-10-27 16:53, Octavio Alvarez wrote:
> On 10/27/2013 02:26 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>>> allows privacy,
>>
>> IMHO big nonsense. The company (amongst many others!) you work for 
>> uses amongst others cookies to track their people, and if they really 
>> bother could even use natural language structure, search query types, 
>> and other behavior for breaking this 'privacy'. Also note that even 
>> if the last 64bits are random, your company should be more than able 
>> to say "oh, there are typically X users in there, it likely is Y"...
> 
> Then why deprecate EUI-64?

I did not state anything like that. I have only raised concern about stating that "IPv6 privacy addresses" are a real thing.

I am pro /64 per link and a /48 for Enterprise and at least /56 for Home-user sites. (/60 is too tiny and not flexible enough)

Greets,
 Jeroen

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------