[75893] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Fred Baker)
Sat Nov 27 13:33:50 2004
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 10:27:30 -0800
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
Cc: "Ryan O'Connell" <ryan-nanog@complicity.co.uk>,
Jeroen Massar <jeroen@unfix.org>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <2147483647.1101513273@imac-en0.delong.sj.ca.us>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
At 11:54 PM 11/26/04 -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>IMHO, the rules that qualify someone for an AS number should qualify them
>>for a prefix. It need not be a truly long prefix, but larger than a /48.
>
>I agree with the first part, but, a /48 is 65,536 64 bit subnets. Do you
>really think most organizations need more than that? Or, by larger than
>a /48 did you mean a longer prefix (smaller allocation/assignment)?
The important part there is "most networks".
What about a network that is not one of "most networks"? My point is that
one size does not fit all, and that "most" != "all". So I think we need a
policy that applies in the general case, a policy that applies in specific
cases where the general case doesn't work, and a rule for saying which
policy applies.
