nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 Ignorance
From: joel jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 08:37:57 -0700
On 9/17/12 8:23 AM, Adrian Bool wrote:
Which fine except we have assignment practices that have the result requiring the allocation of much shorter prefixes. Just handing out /32s fails the objective reality test.Hi Mike, On 17 Sep 2012, at 16:04, Mike Simkins <mike.simkins () sungard com> wrote:RIPE 552 (I think), allows you to request up to a /29 without additional justification if needed.Sure, but you're just tinkering at the edges here. 32-bits would be a more sensible allocation size to LIRs, allowing them construct their addressing plan in a logical, hierarchal manner whilst allowing for growth - and most importantly ensuring they only advertise a single route into the global routing table.
Regarding the single route, no they don't. and nobody that I know is filtering on /32 or longer.
Kind regards, Adrian
Current thread:
- RE: IPv6 Ignorance, (continued)
- RE: IPv6 Ignorance John R. Levine (Sep 28)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance George Herbert (Sep 28)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Jason Leschnik (Sep 28)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Adrian Bool (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance John Mitchell (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Owen DeLong (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Nick Hilliard (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Adrian Bool (Sep 17)
- RE: IPv6 Ignorance Mike Simkins (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Adrian Bool (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance joel jaeggli (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Blake Dunlap (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Mark Blackman (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Owen DeLong (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Owen DeLong (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Matthew Kaufman (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Owen DeLong (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Eugen Leitl (Sep 17)
- RE: IPv6 Ignorance Blake Pfankuch (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Owen DeLong (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance joel jaeggli (Sep 17)
