ipv6 addressing - non-routable equivalents?

[Robert Elz]

    Date:        Mon, 9 Oct 2000 23:31:12 +0200 (CEST)
    From:        =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Peter_H=E5kanson?= <peter@ipsec.nu>
    Message-ID:  <Pine.BSO.4.10.10010092329530.31634-100000@ipsec.nu>

  | without the "MAC address macic" we could use 64 bit addresses. Just to
  | mention one difference.

Only if no-one was allowed to use the "MAC address magic" way of easy
configuration.

And even then, using 64 bit addresses would cut the effective address space
by 8-12 (maybe even 16) bits (ie: now we probably have an effective address
space of something between 72 and 80 bits, assuming that the vast majority
of the low 64 won't be doing much productive), and there are plenty of people
who believe that the addresses we have are likely to become too small.  I am
pretty sure they're wrong, and even a (more tightly controlled perhaps) 64
bit address space would be adequate, but ...

And in any case, this discussion was all held, and finally resolved, more
than 5 years ago.  Attempting to start it all again now helps no-one.  There
are getting to be a lot of IPv6 implementations around now, they are not all
going to change without a very good reason.

kre