[184343] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: How to wish you hadn't forced ipv6 adoption (was "How to force
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mel Beckman)
Fri Oct 2 09:35:47 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Mel Beckman <mel@beckman.org>
To: Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 13:35:41 +0000
In-Reply-To: <335329195.1393.1443784549610.JavaMail.mhammett@ThunderFuck>
Cc: nanog group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Every provider gets a /32, according to ARIN.
IPv6 - INITIAL ALLOCATIONS
Type of Resource Request Criteria to Receive Resource
ISP Initial Allocation
/32 minimum allocation
(/36 upon request)
NRPM 6.5.1<https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six51>
* Have a previously justified IPv4 ISP allocation from ARIN or one of i=
ts predecessor registries, or
* Qualify for an IPv4 ISP allocation under current policy, or
* Intend to immediately multi-home, or
* Provide a reasonable technical justification, including a plan showin=
g projected assignments for one, two, and five year periods, with a minimum=
of 50 assignments within five years
IPv6 Multiple Discrete Networks
/32 minimum allocation
(/36 upon request)
NRPM 6.11<https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six_11>
* be a single entity and not a consortium of smaller independent entiti=
es
-mel via cell
On Oct 2, 2015, at 4:15 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net<mailto:nanog@ics=
-il.net>> wrote:
Not all providers are large enough to justify a /32.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Philip Dorr" <tagno25@gmail.com<mailto:tagno25@gmail.com>>
To: "Rob McEwen" <rob@invaluement.com<mailto:rob@invaluement.com>>
Cc: "nanog group" <nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2015 11:14:35 PM
Subject: Re: How to wish you hadn't forced ipv6 adoption (was "How to force=
rapid ipv6 adoption")
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Rob McEwen <rob@invaluement.com<mailto:rob=
@invaluement.com>> wrote:
On 10/1/2015 11:44 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
IPv6 really isn't much different to IPv4. You use sites /48's
rather than addresses /32's (which are effectively sites). ISP's
still need to justify their address space allocations to RIR's so
their isn't infinite numbers of sites that a spammer can get.
A /48 can be subdivided into 65K subnets. That is 65 *THOUSAND*... not the
256 IPs that one gets with an IPv4 /24 block. So if a somewhat legit hoster
assigns various /64s to DIFFERENT customers of theirs... that is a lot of
collateral damage that would be caused by listing at the /48 level, should
just one customer be a bad-apple spammer, or just one legit customer have a
compromised system one day.
As a provider (ISP or Hosting), you should hand the customers at a
minimum a /56, if not a /48. The provider should have at a minimum a
/32. If the provider is only giving their customers a /64, then they
deserve all the pain they receive.
