[138572] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route table
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Walter)
Thu Mar 10 15:02:19 2011
From: Mike Walter <mwalter@3z.net>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 20:00:40 +0000
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1103101030350.9604@whammy.cluebyfour.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Is anyone staying away from certain address ranges in /127s? I have seen w=
here they say not to use the all zeros or end addresses from 1 - 127. Thou=
ghts on this? =20
-Mike=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Justin M. Streiner [mailto:streiner@cluebyfour.org]=20
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 10:36 AM
To: Richard A Steenbergen
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route table sizeconsid=
erations
On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:52:37AM -0800, George Bonser wrote:
>>
>> What I have done on point to points and small subnets between routers
>> is to simply make static neighbor entries. That eliminates any
>> neighbor table exhaustion causing the desired neighbors to become
>> unreachable. I also do the same with neighbors at public peering
>> points. Yes, that comes at the cost of having to reconfigure the
>> entry if a MAC address changes, but that doesn't happen often.
>
> And this is better than just not trying to implement IPv6 stateless
> auto-configuration on ptp links in the first place how exactly? Don't
> get taken in by the people waving an RFC around without actually taking
> the time to do a little critical thinking on their own first, /64s and
> auto-configuration just don't belong on router ptp links. And btw only a
> handful of routers are so poorly designed that they depend on not having
> subnets longer than /64s when doing IPv6 lookups, and there are many
> other good reasons why you should just not be using those boxes in the
> first place. :)
+1
Auto-config has its place, and I don't think core infrastructure is one of=
=20
them.
In our addressing plan, I've allocated /64s for each point-to-point link,=20
but will use /127s in practice. That seemed like the best compromise=20
between throwing /64s at everything and being prepared for the off-chance=20
that something absolutely requires a /64.
jms
