[167068] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AT&T UVERSE Native IPv6, a HOWTO
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rob Seastrom)
Fri Nov 29 13:31:35 2013
To: Jean-Francois.TremblayING@videotron.com
From: Rob Seastrom <rs@seastrom.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 13:31:08 -0500
In-Reply-To: <OF471BD0B7.98B51D3F-ON85257C32.0049563F-85257C32.004BC65F@videotron.com>
(Jean-Francois TremblayING's message of "Fri, 29 Nov 2013 08:47:38 -0500")
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Jean-Francois.TremblayING@videotron.com writes:
> Offering /48s out of a single /16 block, to take a simple example,
> would use a whole /32.
Sounds as if your organization can justify more than the /32
"minimum/default" allocation of IPv6 then (I'd imagine you have more
than a minimum-assignment /22 of IPv4 space based on my interactions
with Videotron back circa 2004 too). Have you tried asking for more
IPv6 space, backed up with your network architecture documents?
> This space wouldn't be used much anyway,
> given that most 6RD routers use only one /64, sometimes two.
> I argue that a /60 is actually the best compromise here, from
> a space and usage point of view.
IPv4-thinking. In the fullness of time this line of reasoning will be
greeted with the same wry grin and eyeroll that the NANOG community
today reserves for academics who teach their students "classful
networking".
-r
