v6 & DSL / Cable modems
tdurack at gmail.com
Fri Feb 6 14:28:02 UTC 2009
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 8:51 AM, Jack Bates <jbates at brightok.net> wrote:
> Joe Loiacono wrote:
>> Indeed it does. And don't forget that the most basic data object in the
>> routing table, the address itself, is 4 times as big.
> Let's also not forget, that many organizations went from multiple
> allocations to a single allocation. If we all filter anything longer than
> /32, we'll rearrange the flow of traffic that many over the years have
> altered through longer prefixes. Even I suspect I may occasionally have to
> let a /40 out now and then to alter it's traffic from the rest of the
> aggregate. Traffic comes to you as it wants to come to you. The only pseudo
> remedy that currently exists is to move some prefixes over to a different
> path. If you only have a /32, that'll be a bit hard.
> This, more than anything, is what will effect this list and the people on
> it where IPv6 is concerned. Filtering longer than /33, 35, 40? Dare we go to
> /48 and treat them as the new /24? I know for myself, traffic manipulation
> can't begin until /40 (unless I split them further apart).
Given that ARIN at least is assigning end-user /48s out of 2620::/23 it
would be useful to accept these announcements. If not end-user PI is dead in
the water. Some providers might like that. End-users probably won't.
More information about the NANOG