[138602] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dobbins, Roland)
Fri Mar 11 02:22:57 2011
From: "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobbins@arbor.net>
To: nanog group <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 07:22:00 +0000
In-Reply-To: <49E4FB94-3D1B-476B-89C4-78155EDF2749@delong.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 11, 2011, at 2:02 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> If you want to be truly anal about it, you can also block packets to non-=
existent
> addresses on the PtoP links.
Sure, I advocate iACLs to block traffic to p2p links and loopbacks. Still,=
it's best not to turn routers into sinkholes in the first place.
> This isn't a one-time-use of IPv6 addresses and the one-time-uses of IPv6=
addresses are what should be considered unscalable and absurdly wasteful.
I don't know that I agree with this - I can see lots of value in one-time-u=
se addresses/blocks, and have a metaphysical degree of certitude that they'=
ll be used that way in some cases, irrespective of what I think.
> There's a lot to be said for the principle of least surprise and uniform =
/64s actually help with that quite a bit.
Enforcing uniformity of wasteful and potentially harmful addressing practic=
es in the name of consistency isn't necessarily a win, IMHO.
;>
> Frankly, unless you have parallel links, there isn't a definite need to e=
ven number PtoP links for IPv6.
> Every thing you need to do with an interface specific address on a PtoP l=
ink can be done with link local.
Which is why IP unnumbered caught on so well in IPv4-land, heh?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>
The basis of optimism is sheer terror.
-- Oscar Wilde
