[193938] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dennis Bohn)
Thu Mar 2 21:01:34 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CAPkb-7CfLgZouCRrQGtcfad9mQdFqn05B5La__-PoRkx3CtXdw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dennis Bohn <bohn@adelphi.edu>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 21:01:08 -0500
To: Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Interesting question whether 2000::/3 or ::/0 is the better default route.
From what I can tell (as OP indicated) most are using ::/0. (I should
probably add for those who have not been running V6 for long that for the
forseeble future 2000::/3 is the extent of the V6 allocation, the rest
being held back for future use. Which is why that could be a default.) Is
there any case where 2000::/3 would hurt one? One person mentioned
something like 64:ff9b::/96, which per
http://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv6-special-registry/iana-ipv6-special-registry.xhtml,
is the v4 to v6 translator net. Does anyone actually use that?
best,
dennis
Dennis Bohn
Manager of Network and Systems (ret)
Adelphi University
bohn@adelphi.edu
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Shouldn't that be 2000::/3 ?
>
> Den 2. mar. 2017 17.06 skrev "Aaron Gould" <aaron1@gvtc.com>:
>
> Correction... ::/0 is what I learn from those 3 :)
>
