[150979] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeroen Massar)
Fri Mar 9 04:28:28 2012
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:27:04 +0100
From: Jeroen Massar <jeroen@unfix.org>
To: Jeff Wheeler <jsw@inconcepts.biz>
In-Reply-To: <CAPWAtbJx56qyroisNYmB=0q8dDYMixfZBfQwDTVxmW=Y6mhP6w@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Mehmet Akcin <mehmet@akcin.net>, NANOG Mailing List <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2012-03-09 10:02 , Jeff Wheeler wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Mehmet Akcin <mehmet@akcin.net> wrote:
>> if you know anyone who is filtering /48 , you can start telling them to STOP doing so as a good citizen of internet6.
>
> I had a bit of off-list discussion about this topic, and I was not
> going to bring it up today on-list, but since the other point of view
> is already there, I may as well.
>
> Unless you are going to pay the bill for my clients to upgrade their
> 3BXL/3CXL systems (and similar) to XXL and then XXXL, I think we need
> to do two things before IPv6 up-take is really broad:
>
> 1) absolutely must drop /48 de-aggregates from ISP blocks
See the strict filter at:
http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html
which has been proposed for quite a long time already.
Also note the existence of this awesome thing called RPSL.
See also this great presentation by ras:
http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog44/presentations/Tuesday/RAS_irrdata_N44.pdf
and the very recent column by Geoff Huston:
http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2012-03/leaks.html
> 2) absolutely must make RIR policy so orgs can get /48s for
> anycasting, and whatever other purposes
One can already receive those easily, generally as a /48.
Also, quite a few organizations are requesting disjunct /32's per
country or at least a /32 per region....
Greets,
Jeroen
