[114179] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Where to buy Internet IP addresses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Mon May 4 04:31:20 2009
Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 10:31:10 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <214A65F4-209E-401D-B67D-DBC33A515D09@daork.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, 4 May 2009, Nathan Ward wrote:
> I think that they have to be forwarded. What do you do if people chain
> three routers? How does your actual CPE know to dish out a /60 and not a
> /64 or something? What if someone chains four? What if someone puts
> three devices behind the second?
This is a CPE problem, the main homegateway can decide to dish out /64s to
all other home routers, this means they can have a bunch. It also means
they can't chain 3 in serial, unless the home user decides to hand out
/60s to each and only have 3 of them connected to the main CPE.
> These are weird topologies, sure, but coming up with some algorithm to handle
> some of them and not others is going to be too complicated, and leave some
> people without a workable solution.
This is where innovation will happen in the home market, but only if we
hand them a /56 to start with.
> Forwarding these requests up to the ISP's router and having several PDs per
> end customer is in my opinion the best way to go.
Why is this better? Why do you want to waste your tcam entries like that?
A single /56 per customer makes you have the fewest amount of tcam entries
in any solution I can imagine. All other solutions require more.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
