Does Nibbana lie within The All or not? The Sabba Sutta (SN 35.23) (trans. Thanissaro) states:


  The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye &amp; forms, ear &amp;
  sounds, nose &amp; aromas, tongue &amp; flavors, body &amp; tactile sensations,
  intellect &amp; ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who
  would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if
  questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement,
  would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief.
  Why? Because it lies beyond range."


The commentary on this sutta by Thanissaro Bhikkhu states:


  Furthermore, the following discourse (SN 35.24) says that the "All" is
  to be abandoned. At no point does the Canon say that nibbana is to be
  abandoned. Nibbana follows on cessation (nirodha), which is to be
  realized. Once nibbana is realized, there are no further tasks to be
  done.
  
  Thus it seems more this discourse's discussion of "All" is meant to
  limit the use of the word "all" throughout the Buddha's teachings to
  the six sense spheres and their objects. As the following discourse
  shows, this would also include the consciousness, contact, and
  feelings connected with the sense spheres and their objects. Nibbana
  would lie outside of the word, "all." This would fit in with another
  point made several times in the Canon: that dispassion is the highest
  of all dhammas (Iti 90), while the arahant has gone beyond even
  dispassion (Sn 4.6; Sn 4.10).
  
  This raises the question, if the word "all" does not include nibbana,
  does that mean that one may infer from the statement, "all phenomena
  are not-self" that nibbana is self? The answer is no. As AN 4.174
  states, to even ask if there is anything remaining or not remaining
  (or both, or neither) after the cessation of the six sense spheres is
  to differentiate what is by nature undifferentiated (or to objectify
  the unobjectified — see the Introduction to MN 18). The range of
  differentiation goes only as far as the "All." Perceptions of self or
  not-self, which would count as differentiation, would not apply beyond
  the "All." When the cessation of the "All" is experienced, all
  differentiation is allayed.


On the other hand, Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote in the book The Connected Discourses of the Buddha Vol II: 


  On first consideration, it would seem that the six internal and
  external sense bases should be understood simply as the six sense
  faculties and their objects, with the term āyatana, base, having the
  sense of origin or source. Though many suttas lend support to this
  supposition, the Theravada exegetical tradition, beginning already
  from the Abhidhamma period, understands the six pairs of  bases as a
  complete scheme of  classification capable of  accommodating all the
  factors of existence mentioned in the Nikayas. This conception of the
  six bases probably originated from the Sabba Sutta (35:23), in which
  the Buddha says that the six pairs of bases are "the all" apart from
  which nothing at all exists. To make the six bases capable of
  literally incorporating everything, the Vibhanga of the Abhidhamma 
  Pitaka defines the mind  base (manāyatana) as  including all classes
  of consciousness, and the mental phenomena  base (dhammāyatana) as
  including the other three mental aggregates, subtle nonsensuous types
  of form, and even the unconditioned element, Nibbāna (see Vibh 70-73).


So, Thanissaro Bhikkhu says that Nibbana is not included in The All. Bhikkhu Bodhi says Nibbana is included in The All. Who is right? And why?

What is also interesting is that Bhikkhu Bodhi's interpretation would put all types of consciousness within the classification of the six sense bases.
I didn't read the question but Thanissaro says as a footnote: 


  To abandon the eye, etc., here means to abandon passion and desire for these things.


Nibbana is the same. Nibbana is not experienced due to passion &amp; desire for Nibbana. Therefore, passion &amp; desire for Nibbana is also abandoned. 

Nibbana is included within The All, i.e., included as a sense object (per Ud 8.1) experienced by the mind sense organ. Thanissaro is wrong translating 'dhamme' as 'ideas'. 'Dhamme' is 'mind objects'. Nibbana, per Ud 8.1, is a mind object or 'ayatana'.