[117901] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ISP customer assignments
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tim Durack)
Mon Oct 5 21:41:44 2009
In-Reply-To: <3c3e3fca0910051832u198ef1aao7e29fb7603052954@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 21:41:19 -0400
From: Tim Durack <tdurack@gmail.com>
To: William Herrin <herrin-nanog@dirtside.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org, Robert.E.VanOrmer@frb.gov
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> So now Verizon is in open revolt against ARIN. They positively refuse
> to carry /48's from legitimately multihomed users. Eff 'em. Perhaps
> Verizon would sooner see IPv6 go down in flames than see their TCAMs
> fill up again. Who knows their reasoning?
>
> Agree or disagree, it is indeed food for thought. One thing I can say
> with confidence: as a community we truly haven't grasped the major
> implications of an address space that isn't scarce coupled with a
> routing table that is.
Thing is, I'm an end user site. I need more that a /48, but probably
less than a /32. Seeing as how we have an AS and PI, PA isn't going to
cut it. What am I supposed to do? ARIN suggested creative subnetting.
We pushed back and got a /41. If IPv6 doesn't scratch an itch, why
bother?
There are plenty of high-profile end user sites in 2620::/23. Some
government (CIA), some popular (Facebook.) I don't think Verizon's
stand is going to last.
Tim:>
