Using /126 for IPv6 router links

Christopher Morrow morrowc.lists at gmail.com
Tue Jan 26 11:23:42 CST 2010


On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Tim Durack <tdurack at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Christopher Morrow
> <morrowc.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>> some of what you're saying (tim) here is that you could: (one of these)
>>
>> 1) go to all your remote-office ISP's and get a /48 from each
>> 2) go to *RIR's and get /<something> to cover the number of remote
>> sites you have in their region(s)
>> 3) keep on keepin' on until something better comes along?
>
> This isn't really for remote offices, just our large campus sites.

ok, cool... but they'll need to connect to remote offices? or is that
just not something you all do?

>
>> 2)
>>  o justification in light of 'unclear' policies for an address block
>> of the right size. NOTE:I don't think the policies is unclear, but
>> that could be my misreading of the policies.
>
> For me, this seems unclear:
>
> 6.5.4.2. Assignment of multiple /48s to a single end site
> When a single end site requires an additional /48 address block, it
> must request the assignment with documentation or materials that
> justify the request. Requests for multiple or additional /48s will be
> processed and reviewed (i.e., evaluation of justification) at the RIR
> level.
> Note: There is no experience at the present time with the assignment
> of multiple /48s to the same end site. Having the RIR review all such
> assignments is intended to be a temporary measure until some
> experience has been gained and some common policies can be developed.
> In addition, additional work at defining policies in this space will
> likely be carried out in the near future.

I always read this as 'end site' == 'street address'. So, if you have
an office at 123 any st, elbonia, IN. and that gets large enough that
you have 66k subnets and thus need another /48... you'd have to
document the reasoning for that.

If you have 12 sites though, each at different locations and were
applying for PI space, it seems you'd ask for a /44 or something like
that... (assuming no growth)

>>  o will your remote-office's ISP's accept the /48's per site? (vz/vzb
>> is a standout example here)
>
> Not too worried about VZ. Given that large content providers are
> getting end-site address space, I think they will have to adjust their
> stance.

most of the large content folks just got +/32 not PI /48's... or
'yahoo and google'. I'm not sure what Akamai's plan is, they often
seem, in the v4 world, to use PA space so maybe that model works for
them in v6 as well.

I agree that eventually vz will most likely change their stance, but
until then, and for the sites who don't have an incentive to change...

>
>>  o will your remote-office's have full reachability to the parts of
>> the network they need access to? (remote ISP's filtering at/above the
>> /48 boundary)
>
> Remote offices aren't included in this plan.

ok... don't have them or don't plan on having them?

-Chris

>> For the Enterprise still used to v4-land ipv6 isn't a win yet... for
>> an ISP it's relatively[0] simple.
>>
>> -Chris
>>
>> 0: address interfaces, turn up protocols, add 'security' assign
>> customers /48's...(yes fight bugs/problems/'why is there a colon in my
>> ip address?"
>>
>> (what if you do have 200 offices in the US which aren't connected on a
>> private network today?)
>>
>
> --
> Tim:>
> Sent from Brooklyn, NY, United States
>




More information about the NANOG mailing list