North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI prefix [Re: who gets a /32)

  • From: Owen DeLong
  • Date: Sat Nov 27 02:55:54 2004


--On Friday, November 26, 2004 10:09 PM -0800 Fred Baker <[email protected]> wrote:

At 11:31 PM 11/25/04 -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:

I think the policy _SHOULD_ make provisions for end sites and
circumstances like this, but, currently, I believe it _DOES NOT_ make
such  a provision.

I understand the policy in the same way. That said, I believe that the
policy is wrong.


Agreed.


IMHO, the rules that qualify someone for an AS number should qualify them
for a prefix. It need not be a truly long prefix, but larger than a /48.


I agree with the first part, but, a /48 is 65,536 64 bit subnets.  Do you
really think most organizations need more than that?  Or, by larger than
a /48 did you mean a longer prefix (smaller allocation/assignment)?


My logic is this. We grant someone an AS number not because we think they
are an ISP, but because we believe that they are sufficiently well
connected that using BGP to advertise their routing is necessary, and
running BGP to a number of neighbors implies an AS number. Well, if you
are sufficiently well-connected to need to advertise your routing in BGP,
ingress policing is going to materially hurt you in your use of said
multiple ISPs. You want an address that you can safely originate from,
and you want to be able to use routing to multihome in the other
direction.


Agreed.

Owen


--
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.

Attachment: pgp00097.pgp
Description: PGP signature