[195158] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (joel jaeggli)
Wed Jun 28 21:43:41 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: Olivier Benghozi <olivier.benghozi@wifirst.fr>,
"nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 18:43:32 -0700
In-Reply-To: <0D3AAB86-C266-4E2E-BF10-6B61D5E53AE6@wifirst.fr>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--2lsO1xj5Iixja5QMffBABFa1g6BIPQ07p
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
To: Olivier Benghozi <olivier.benghozi@wifirst.fr>,
"nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Message-ID: <e5727052-d446-02ab-fc53-7a84f7da6daf@bogus.com>
Subject: Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes
References: <F65C7EBE548EA94E8D86C0E31727CDF479416E16@PRIFRTEXCH02.ca.primus>
<CACWOCC9nx_ZB9dg7U8hicG6DDUEuho2i8kDMxQBkgQtCg_o2UQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAL9Qcx6czj0ojP5bbd29=Z38foQ8Zv=2kSbOaOYyQ1Oijyg-hw@mail.gmail.com>
<001f01d2f06a$d5d87ca0$818975e0$@gvtc.com>
<CAP-guGXnX_-CNCmiBGyf-EBN=wofhNq4CoSKv=QKROOQOtn95A@mail.gmail.com>
<0D3AAB86-C266-4E2E-BF10-6B61D5E53AE6@wifirst.fr>
In-Reply-To: <0D3AAB86-C266-4E2E-BF10-6B61D5E53AE6@wifirst.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 6/28/17 18:10, Olivier Benghozi wrote:
> Well, /112 is not a stupid option (and is far smarter than /64): it con=
tains the whole last nibble of an IPv6, that is x:x:x:x:x:x:x:1234.
> You always put 1 or 2 at the end, and if needed you are still able to a=
ddress additional stuff would the point-to-point link become a LAN.
> And you don't throw away billions of addresses like with /64.
If you were subnetting down from /64 for the purposes of preventing ndp
exhaustion or to protect the control plane on either yours or your
customers platforms then a /112 is pretty useless because 16 bits is
harmful enough.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6583
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6164
>> On 29 jun 2017 at 02:32, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote :
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 8:01 PM, Aaron Gould <aaron1@gvtc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think this is funny... I have (4) 10 gig internet connections and h=
ere's
>>> the maskings for my v6 dual stacking...
>>>
>>> /126 - telia
>>> /64 - att
>>> /112 - cogent
>>> /127 - twc/charter/spectrum
>> 112... Could be worse I suppose. They could have picked 113.
>
--2lsO1xj5Iixja5QMffBABFa1g6BIPQ07p
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iEYEARECAAYFAllUW0QACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrKcvwCeNivX8BpNAuMArEl1PMRBVtD0
6u0AniQ6870Wyciobf7dF9ofGUQCkBkq
=7VW9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--2lsO1xj5Iixja5QMffBABFa1g6BIPQ07p--
