[139976] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Prefix announcing
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Tue Apr 26 15:36:35 2011
In-Reply-To: <4B4120B1642DCF48ACA84E4F82C8E1F65B83E20FC4@EXCH>
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 13:32:11 -0600
To: Kate Gerry <kate@quadranet.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I know that used to be true, but, to the best of my knowledge, everyone is n=
ow accepting
down to /48s in provider independent ranges. Some still require /32 or short=
er in the provider aggregate ranges.
Owen
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 26, 2011, at 10:39 AM, Kate Gerry <kate@quadranet.com> wrote:
> Funny enough, some carriers actually require the 'smallest' as being /32..=
. :(
>=20
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Justin M. Streiner [mailto:streiner@cluebyfour.org]=20
> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 9:34 AM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: IPv6 Prefix announcing
>=20
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2011, Nick Olsen wrote:
>=20
>> I've always been under the impression its best practice to only=20
>> announce prefixes of a /24 and above when it comes to IPv4 and BGP.
>> I was wondering if something similar had been agreed upon regarding IPv6.=
>> And if That's the case, What's the magic number? /32? /48? /64?
>=20
> You're likely to get different answers to this, but the 'magic number'=20
> appears to be /48. Looking in the v6 BGP table, you will likely find smal=
ler prefixes than that, but a number of the major carriers seem to be settli=
ng on /48 as the smallest prefix they will accept. /48 is also the smallest=
block most of the RIRs will assign to end-users.
>=20
> jms
>=20
