[jeroenhd]

ISPs handing out /64 are quite stingy, /56 is the recommended range to hand out to clients. It used to be /48 but people got worried about address range exhaustion so they changed it.

The reason for these larger blocks isn't that you need several hundred billion IP addresses per se, but that IPv6 can't create subnets (without terrible tooling issues) smaller than /64. In a way, getting a /64 from your ISP is like being forced to use a router that's stuck in the 192.168.0.x space for DHCP. A /56 will give you 255 subnets, a /48 will give you 65k in total. More than enough I'd say.

A /32 will give you as many subnets are there are IPv4 addresses out there today, I don't see why you'd need that. It's nice of them to offer it (for a significant price, of course) but I don't think businesses really need address space that huge.

IPv6 has a ridiculous amount of address space, we may as well use it.

[lokedhs]

My ISP gives me a static /48. I'm currently using 5 subnets, so I could probably have survived with a /56. I'm glad I have a full /48 though.

I switched from my previous ISP because they only have me a /64. It was quite honestly useless for me, since I couldn't even split it into two subnets. They did it because they clearly had old network equipment and were using 6rd to provide IPv6.

[GoblinSlayer]

I believe all ip4 lans I saw survived with just one subnet. What's the need for more?

[philjohn]

I'm with Zen in the UK and they give out /48's which is nice, and makes subnet management much easier.