[173819] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 route annoucement
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Corey Touchet)
Thu Aug 7 17:24:53 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Corey Touchet <corey.touchet@corp.totalserversolutions.com>
To: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 21:22:49 +0000
In-Reply-To: <bdc20a2a2ce17f668939ac7477502f1b@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Pretty strong reaction for a single prefix.
Now if you said you wanted to advertise all your /64=B9s that would be a
different conversation.
On 8/7/14, 2:58 PM, "John York" <johny@griffintechnology.com> wrote:
>Hoping to not start a war...
>
>We (a multi-homed end-user site) are finally getting IPv6-enabled Internet
>connectivity from one of our ISPs. In conversations regarding our BGP
>config, the ISP has balked at allowing us to advertise our ARIN-assigned
>/44, saying things like, "do you know how many addresses that is!!??"
>
>Am I way off base in thinking this network size is not out of the norm? I
>know it's a lot of addresses (19 octillion-something?), but that
>assignment was based on the same criteria that got us a /22 in v4 space.
>Should accepting a /44 in v6 not be equivalent, policy-wise, to accepting
>a /22 in v4?
>
>Thanks,
>John
>
>--
>John York
>Information Technology | Network Administrator
>
>Phone:
>615-399-7000 x:333
>
>Griffin Technology
>2030 Lindell Avenue Nashville, TN 37203 USA
