[154921] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Tue Jul 17 00:31:52 2012
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD8GWssKuQ3qhADHKCvQeXa0U+aLH0291i3PwArAo1Tyw=mDrg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 21:26:00 -0700
To: Lee <ler762@gmail.com>
Cc: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>, nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
You could try this:
If you give a /48 to each site, then assign the sites primary and backup =
firewalls.
Aggregate the /48s into larger blocks by primary firewall.
Aggregate the primary firewall bocks into larger backup firewall =
aggregates.
Advertise the firewall-specific aggregates and the less specific =
backup-firewall set
aggregates.
Owen
On Jul 16, 2012, at 7:04 PM, Lee wrote:
> On 7/15/12, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
>>> I feel like I should be able to do something really nice with an
>>> absurdly large address space. But lack of imagination or whatever.. =
I
>>> haven't come up with anything that really appeals to me.
>>=20
>> Use a fresh IP for every HTTP request, email message, and IM. Just =
think of
>> how well you can do error management.
>=20
> hrmm... nope, can't think of a single thing. Then again, I'm on the
> routing & switching team at work, so things like HTTP requests, email
> messages, and IM are just different types of user traffic that needs
> to be routed to me.
>=20
> Recall the message I was responding to:
>=20
>>>> There is a HUGE difference between IPv4 and IPv6 thinking. We've =
all
>>>> been living in an austerity regime for so long that we've =
completely
>>>> forgotten how to leave parsimony behind. Even those of us who =
worked
>>>> at companies that were summarily handed a Class B when we mumbled
>>>> something about "internal subnetting" have a really hard time
>>>> remembering how to act when we suddenly don't have to answer for =
every
>>>> single host address and can design a network to conserve other =
things
>>>> (like our brain cells).
>=20
> I read it as design a network >>addressing scheme<< to conserve other
> things & was hoping someone could share new ways of looking at it. I
> feel like I'm stuck in "IPv4 think" with an addressing plan that's
> basically
>=20
> Each site gets a /48. Even the ones with less than 200 people.
> Each subnet is assigned a /64 except for loopbacks & p2p subnets.
> First 256 subnets in each /48 are reserved for things like loopback
> addresses, p2p links, switch management subnets, etc.
> High order 4 bits of the site address are used for the subnet type.
> So a /52 tells you the site and if it's users, printers, servers, IP
> phones, or whatever.
>=20
> Which is *boring*. Nothing novel, no breaking out of "IPv4 think"
> aside from massively wasting address space. Which brings me back
> around to my original request for suggestions. What's the new way of
> looking at designing a network addressing scheme?
>=20
> Regards,
> Lee
