[130997] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Definitive Guide to IPv6 adoption
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Bates)
Tue Oct 19 01:54:06 2010
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 00:53:43 -0500
From: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <86aambhw90.fsf@seastrom.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 10/18/2010 7:16 PM, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
> You are to be commended for your leadership in conserving space. Our
> children will surely be grateful that thanks to your efforts they have
> 99.99999% of IPv6 space left to work with rather than the paltry
> 99.9975% that might have been their inheritance were it not for your
> efforts. Bravo!
Thanks. Actually, I think people are following the RIR example. ARIN
handed out a /32 as standard for an ISP, so a /32 is the framework even
a medium sized ISP will use.
Our routing/IP Numbering Plan:
<regional assignment><pop assignment><customer assignment>
/40 regional assignment supporting 256 regional assignments
/44 for only 16 pop assignments?
/48 to customer for only 16 customers per pop assignment?
Perhaps another view
/40 regional assignment supporting 256 regional assignments
/44 still for 16 pop assignments
/56 to customer for 4096 customer assignments
I'm sorry, but I just couldn't find a way to make /48 to customers work
appropriately, and ARIN seems to think a /32 is fair, yet I have to
design an IP assignment plan up front to make for more efficient
routing. I actually expect a /42-/43 per pop, and /38 per region even in
the /56 to customer model.
Jack
