[167041] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AT&T UVERSE Native IPv6, a HOWTO
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Constantine A. Murenin)
Thu Nov 28 17:38:07 2013
In-Reply-To: <5648A8908CCB564EBF46E2BC904A75B19681060E62@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:37:52 -0800
From: "Constantine A. Murenin" <mureninc@gmail.com>
To: Leo Vegoda <leo.vegoda@icann.org>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 28 November 2013 13:07, Leo Vegoda <leo.vegoda@icann.org> wrote:
> Andrew D Kirch wrote:
>
> Was I the only one who thought that everything about this was great
> apart from this comment:
>
>> In reality additional poking leads me to believe AT&T gives you a
> rather
>> generous /60
>
> Is a /60 what is considered generous these days? I thought a /48 was
> considered normal and a /56 was considered a bit tight. What prefix
> lengths are residential access providers handing out by default these
> days?
Remember, this is just 6rd. With 6rd, a /60 does sound quite generous indeed.
And it's a /60 for each IPv4 you have, e.g. if you have a static IP
allocation with AT&T U-verse, say, a /27, then you're effectively
getting a /55 (plus also an additional /60 for the DHCP address in a
shared subnet to which your /27 is routed to).
That said, I wholeheartedly agree with your comment otherwise.
C.
