[97096] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IPv6 Advertisements
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (michael.dillon@bt.com)
Fri Jun 1 08:19:01 2007
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2007 13:02:48 +0100
In-Reply-To: <0B7EA632-2D91-4D88-8CB3-636DDE255F8C@muada.com>
From: <michael.dillon@bt.com>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
> > I believe that a separate /48 per site is better regardless=20
> of whether=20
> > or not the company has contracted with a single ISP for all=20
> sites, or=20
> > not. As far as I am concerned if there is a separate access=20
> circuit,=20
> > then it is a site and it deserves its own /48 assignment/allocation.
>=20
> So aggregation is no longer a goal?
Aggregation is not harmed by the /48 per site decision.=20
If an ISP wants to aggregate their IPv6 traffic, they will announce one
block for their entire global network. Then, internally, they will
assign /48s in LA from a western USA internal allocation and /48s in
Hamburg from a northwestern Europe internal allocation. If those two
sites happen to belong to the same customer, then they could assign the
customer a /48 to cover both sites and carry longer prefixes internal so
that LA traffic stays in or near LA, and Hamburg traffic stays in or
near Germany. Of course, if both sites are different companies, or if
both sites belong to the same company but they contract with different
ISPs in each country, then the sites will get a /48 assignment without
question.
--Michael Dillon
=20
