[163331] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IP4 address conservation method
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Papandreou)
Wed Jun 5 17:21:11 2013
From: Christopher Papandreou <chrisp@softlayer.com>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 21:20:44 +0000
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1306050028410.12285@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Hi Mikael,
(Sorry if you are getting a duplicate copy of this.)
In our network we had a couple of problems with RFC3069. Not all the hardwa=
re we currently use supports the RFC so we tried to come up with a solution=
that worked and didn't have us opening a lot of ERs (I know I reference 1 =
ER in the presentation but that's just 1 rather than a lot). We have more t=
han just routers to consider (i.e. load balancers, firewalls, etc..) and do=
n't want to lock ourselves in to any particular vendor. We also wanted a so=
lution that we could easily migrate our customers into rather than complete=
ly taking them off line while we "retrofit" them into a new config (as prob=
ably would've been the case if we tried implementing RFC3069). Additionally=
, for a number of our customers we needed a solution that worked with a FHR=
P. I don't currently see a way to do that with RFC3069 but if I've missed s=
omething please let me know.
Thanks,
ChrisP.
SoftLayer Technologies
chrisp@softlayer.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:swmike@swm.pp.se]=20
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 5:34 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: IP4 address conservation method
I read:
http://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/tues.general.Papandreou.conservati=
on.24.pdf
I would like to point out RFC 3069. On most cisco equipment this is done us=
ing static routes and "ip unnumbered".
So my question is basically: What am I missing? Why can't data center guys =
not build their network the same way regular ETTH is done? Either one vlan =
per customer and sharing the IPv4 subnet between several vlans, or having s=
everal customers in the same vlan but use antispoofing etc (IETF SAVI-wg
functionality) to handle the security stuff?
One vlan per customer also works very well with IPv6.
--=20
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
