[177713] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 allocation plan, security, and 6-to-4 conversion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (joel jaeggli)
Sat Jan 31 17:28:21 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 12:21:43 -0800
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
To: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org>,
Eric Louie <elouie@techintegrity.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1501301123170.3013@whammy.cluebyfour.org>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--eu7il7A8LgF5cCPJ8UaUIjpStJR9N7FS0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 1/30/15 8:29 AM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Jan 2015, Eric Louie wrote:
>=20
>> It also sounds like the Internet (aka the upstream/Tier 1 carriers) do=
n't
>> want me to advertise anything longer than my /32 into BGPv6. Is that
>> true?
>> (I'm getting that from the spamming comments made by others) Am I
>> supposed to be asking ARIN for a /32 for each region that I want to
>> address? (They turned down my request for an increase to a /28 last
>> year)
>=20
> Not true. A peek at the global IPv6 routing table shows lots of
> prefixes that are smaller than /32. One of the hopes with larger
> allocations and assignments was that there would be less bloat in the
> global IPv6 routing table because networks would need to announce fewer=
> prefixes. How well that will hold up in practice remains to be seen :)=
Direct assignments exist down to /48s so you can expect to have to
accept announcements down to that size given that they can't concievably
be covered by an aggregate.
>> As far as the v6 to v4 translation is concerned, I'm looking at that f=
or
>> the future - for the time being, we will be dual-stacked. However, if=
we
>> move into a new area, based on our current IPv4 inventory, I don't rea=
lly
>> have enough to assign to each new customer, so I was looking for ways =
to
>> allow those customers access to properties that are still IPv4 only. =
Is
>> there yet another way to do that?
>=20
> If you assign a customer IPv6 space only, a translation mechanism is
> needed to allow that customer to reach Internet destinations that only
> speak IPv4 today. There's no way around that.
>=20
> jms
>=20
--eu7il7A8LgF5cCPJ8UaUIjpStJR9N7FS0
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iEYEARECAAYFAlTNOVcACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrLmhwCfcOFdMnobRV1F2EnjSc+2lJUz
U24Anj89p0ZfZ5guzi8RI1nrvz3m7Bfi
=E4dQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--eu7il7A8LgF5cCPJ8UaUIjpStJR9N7FS0--
