[154696] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Any advantage of announcing IPv6/64s Or purely misconfiguration?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Graham Beneke)
Mon Jul 9 03:05:09 2012
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 09:04:19 +0200
From: Graham Beneke <graham@apolix.co.za>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CAJ0+aXY26JV8i6Dmh5nOgjaAFTOZSwb64m8+MGk-XZCws4TmDw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@apolix.co.za
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 09/07/2012 08:17, Anurag Bhatia wrote:
> I was just looking around and say a major Indian provider Sify (AS9583) is
> announcing /64s via BGP along with main /32 which is their allocation from
> APNIC.
>
> inet6num: 2001:0E48::/32
> netname: SILNET
>
> I see Tata Comm (Sify's upstream) is accepting /64s while Tinet (one of
> other upstream) is dropping and taking only /32. Other major backbones like
> HE, Level3 dropping but Telia still accepting. Pretty much mixed result.
>
> Is it simply a misconfiguration or there is some use of announcing /64s
> along with main /32?
I would hope its accidental. Most people I've spoken to won't even
consider accepting longer prefixes than /48 and will typically also
refuse to accept any prefixes where there are aggregate announces
covering them.
We're going to end up with a very nasty routing table if people start
pumping all their /64s into it.
--
Graham Beneke
