Re: Charging for IPs

[Saku Ytti via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>]

On Sun, 6 Sept 2026 at 20:17, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:

> Since the context here is “charging for a /31 for bgp”, I presumed we were talking point to point private peering.

Seems tautology to stress that ebgp with no options on ipv4 (31) or
ipv6 (127)  for next hop, has no options for next hop. But I guess
repetition is the mother of learning

In spirit of repetition, this IPv4 NLRI over IPv6 session makes no
behavioural changes to class of next-hops allowable.

-- 
  ++ytti
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/Q4PPU64GT7EALU5YOWJO73DY4WIUKPTI/