@hugo@social.treehouse.systems
Post #2741381
2026-03-15 02:40 UTC
@arichtman@eigenmagic.net ULA:
I'd pick a discrete /48 ULA per site. Numbers are cheap; don't try to ration them.
For v4:
I use a supernet 10.128/16 and then slice blocks per site. I haven't extended that to multiple sites, but the intention is to keep consistency within the blocks for subnets relative to the site base.
The reason for 10.128/16 is to get out of the noise of 192.168/16, but also avoid the lower parts of 10/8 that might be more common in corp networks so I don't have overlaps on eg split tunnel routes for client VPN.
Replies (2)
-
@hugo@social.treehouse.systems 2026-03-15 02:42
For the idea of encoding lat/lon in addressing: Eh, tbh that starts to lean a bit too much into numerology or significance of numbers for my taste. How often are you really going to examine network address bits and try to decode a geographical location from it? If you really want site type information, encode it in DNS zones somewhere in the name hierarchy, imho.
-
@arichtman@eigenmagic.net 2026-03-15 02:45
@hugo@social.treehouse.systems Yea being cheap about v6 makes no sense. Looking at the config instructions for Wireguard at least it looks like site2site is still a client-server setup, so you have to put both on the same /64. Though I guess I could do a reciprocal setup as well - for no good reason lol