North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: v6 subnet size for DSL & leased line customers
Thus spake "Simon Lyall" <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Deepak Jain wrote:Is there anything inherently harmful with suggesting that filtering at RIR boundaries should be expected, but those that accept somewhat more lenient boundaries are nice guys??? When the nice guys run out of resources, they can filter at RIR boundaries and say they are doing so as a security upgrade :_).
In what theory? They'd get at _minimum_ a /48 from each RIR that has approved PIv6. If they needed more, they merely have to fill out the appropriate paperwork showing justification. If they operate in regions where the RIR hasn't approved PIv6, they'd route around the failure there and use space assigned by other RIRs. (Not saying I approve of that, but it's reality.)
Currently ARIN is approving all requests for more than a /48 since there is no definition of what "justify" means in that context. Ebay, which is hardly the size of the companies you listed, got a /41. That obviously needs fixing, but the problem is the opposite of the one you seem to be theorizing.
How should they handle region offices, Especially mutihomed ones?
Announce their prefix from all locations, with more-specifics for TE purposes. Presumably their upstreams would carry the more-specifics since they're being paid to, but folks further away would filter them and only see the covering aggregate, which is good enough.
(Note this assumes they have an internal network; if they didn't, each disconnected part would be a "site" and qualify for a /48 on its own. That's a suboptimal solution, though, for reasons too numerous to list.)
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking