North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: IP renumbering timeframe
Being picky... IDs are possible RFCs RIR documents don't even get that far... :) > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-v3-07.tx > t > is the replacement for 2373 > > http://www.ripe.net/ipv6/global-ipv6-assign-2002-04-25.html > is the replacement for 2374 > > Yes a /16 would allow for 32 bit ASNs. The prior note was looking for a > /32. > > Tony > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Marshall Eubanks [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 3:09 PM > > To: Tony Hain > > Cc: Andy Walden; nanog > > Subject: Re: IP renumbering timeframe > > > > > > This is described in rfc2373 and rfc2374. The 128 bit address space > > is separated into a /64 for each "site" and the remaining 64 bits for > > the MAC address, etc, for interfaces on the site. The > > "public" topology > > is 48 bits, and this is what is supposed to be routable. > > > > This would work with a 32 bit ASN based automatic assignment > > - one /16 > > could be allocated to this, with 32 bits for the ASN, 16 bits > > for "site" > > assignments and 64 bits for interface assignments. > > > > This is _not_ the service model of RFC2374, which envisions 8192 top > > level routing aggregators (TLA's), with other entities getting their > > address blocks from one of the TLA blocks. > > > > Regards > > Marshall > > > > Tony Hain wrote: > > > > > Andy Walden wrote: > > > > > >>On Fri, 31 May 2002, Tony Hain wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >>>What is the point of an ASN if all you are multi-homing is a single > > >>>subnet? > > >>> > > >>Tony, > > >> > > >>I'm missing the correlation between the amount of address > > >>space announced > > >>and multihoming. (Beyond the prefix being too long and potentially > > >>filtered). Care to elaborate? > > >> > > >> > > >>andy > > >> > > > > > > The only reason for an ASN is the need to globally announce routing > > > policy due to multihoming. Unless policy changes, this > > community tends > > > to insist that the prefix length announced via that ASN > > corresponds to a > > > site, not a single subnet. For IPv6 that means a /48 makes > > sense as an > > > initial allocation with a new ASN, and a /64 does not. > > > > > > Tony > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards > > Marshall Eubanks > > > > This e-mail may contain confidential and proprietary information of > > Multicast Technologies, Inc, subject to Non-Disclosure Agreements > > > > > > T.M. Eubanks > > Multicast Technologies, Inc > > 10301 Democracy Lane, Suite 410 > > Fairfax, Virginia 22030 > > Phone : 703-293-9624 Fax : 703-293-9609 > > e-mail : [email protected] > > http://www.multicasttech.com > > > > Test your network for multicast : > > http://www.multicasttech.com/mt/ > > Status of Multicast on the Web : > > http://www.multicasttech.com/status/index.html > > >
|