[101136] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andy Davidson)
Wed Dec 19 07:10:35 2007
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0712191216370.6604@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
From: Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 12:09:07 +0000
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On 19 Dec 2007, at 11:58, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> So, out of our /32, if we assign each customer a /48 we can only
> support 65k customers. So in order to support millions of
> customers, we need a new allocation and I would really like for
> each new subnet allocated to be very much larger so we in the
> forseeable future don't need to get a newer one. So for larger ISPs
> with millions of customers, next step after /32 should be /20 (or
> in that neighborhood). Does RIPE/ARIN policy conform to this, so we
> don't end up with ISPs themselves having tens of aggregates (we
> don't need to drive the default free FIB more than what's really
> needed).
From the RIPE perspective, there are seven "empty" /32s between my /
32 and the next allocation.
I imagine this is fully intentional, and allows the NCC to grow my v6
address pool, without growing my footprint in the v6 routing table.
Andy
