[167548] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 /48 advertisements
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Wed Dec 18 14:13:21 2013
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <52B1D308.7070206@nic.br>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 11:08:39 -0800
To: "Antonio M. Moreiras" <moreiras@nic.br>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Get another /48 for your other location.
Owen
On Dec 18, 2013, at 08:53 , Antonio M. Moreiras <moreiras@nic.br> wrote:
> What do you recommend to an end user that have a direct assignment of =
a
> /48, and would like to disaggregate as part of a traffic engineering
> strategy?
>=20
> Moreiras.
>=20
> On 18/12/13 14:32, Blake Dunlap wrote:
>> Regardless of the carriers, you'll find most ASs on the internet only
>> listen to /48 or larger. So even if you get your prefixes accepted by =
your
>> provider, don't assume you can get anywhere, or have your packets not =
fall
>> in to uRPF blackholes randomly without a larger aggregate =
announcement.
>>=20
>> -Blake
>>=20
>>=20
>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Edward Dore <
>> edward.dore@freethought-internet.co.uk> wrote:
>>=20
>>> If you=92re talking about announcing each location separately, then =
RIPE
>>> have a couple of useful articles about prefix visibility on Ripe =
Labs:
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> =
https://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/ripe-atlas-a-case-study-of-ipv6-48=
-filtering
>>> https://labs.ripe.net/Members/dbayer/visibility-of-prefix-lengths
>>>=20
>>> Otherwise I guess you=92ll need to talk to your chosen carrier(s) =
about
>>> aggregating your space for you, which will come down to their =
policies on
>>> what routes they will carry internally.
>>>=20
>>> Edward Dore
>>> Freethought Internet
>>>=20
>>> On 18 Dec 2013, at 16:11, Cliff Bowles <cliff.bowles@apollogrp.edu> =
wrote:
>>>=20
>>>> I accidentally sent this to nanog-request yesterday. I could use =
some
>>> feedback from anyone that can help, please.
>>>>=20
>>>> Question: will carriers accept IPv6 advertisements smaller than =
/48?
>>>>=20
>>>> Our org was approved a /36 based on number of locations. The bulk =
of
>>> those IPs will be in the data centers. As we were chopping up the =
address
>>> space, it was determined that the remote campus locations would be =
fine
>>> with a /60 per site. (16 networks of /64). There are usually less =
than 50
>>> people at the majority of these locations and only about 10 =
different
>>> functional VLANs (Voice, Data, Local Services, Wireless, Guest =
Wireless,
>>> etc...).
>>>>=20
>>>> Now, there has been talk about putting an internet link in every =
campus
>>> rather than back hauling it all to the data centers via MPLS. =
However, if
>>> we do this, then would we need a /48 per campus? That is massively
>>> wasteful, at 65,536 networks per location. Is the /48 requirement =
set in
>>> stone? Will any carriers consider longer prefixes?
>>>>=20
>>>> I know some people are always saying that the old mentality of
>>> conserving space needs to go away, but I was bitten by that IPv4 =
issue back
>>> in the day and have done a few VLSM network overhauls. I'd rather =
not
>>> massively allocate unless it's a requirement.
>>>>=20
>>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>>=20
>>>> CWB
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> This message is private and confidential. If you have received it =
in
>>> error, please notify the sender and remove it from your system.
>>>>=20
