IPv6 Routing table will be bloated?

Tue Oct 26 18:30:51 UTC 2010

> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 21:19, Sven Olaf Kamphuis <sven at cb3rob.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010, Randy Carpenter wrote:
>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>
>>>> On 10/26/2010 12:04 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> In practice, the RIRs are implementing sparse allocation which makes
>>>>> it
>>>>> possible to aggregate subsequent allocations. I.e. not as bad as it
>>>>> may
>>>>> seem.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Except, if you are given bare minimums, and you are assigning out to
>>>> subtending ISPs bare minimums, those subtending ISPs will end up with
>>>> multiple networks. Some of them are BGP speakers. I can't use sparse
>>>> allocation because I was given minimum space and not the HD-Ratio
>>>> threshold space.
>>>
>>> Wait... If you are issuing space to ISPs that are multihomed, they should
>>> be getting their own addresses. Even if they aren't multihomed, they should
>>> probably be getting their own addresses. Why would you be supplying them
>>> with address space if they are an ISP?
>>>
>>> -Randy
>>
>> to my knowledge, RIPE still does not issue ipv6 PI space.
>> so giving them their own space, is "problematic" to say the least.
>
> I got a /48 PI from RIPE a few months back.
> Maybe your knowledge needs to be a little bit refreshed regarding RIPE
> allocation policies :)
>
Magically, indeed, an ipv6 pi request form showed up in the lirportal.
amazing!