North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: IPv6 Advertisements

  • From: Stephen Sprunk
  • Date: Sat Jun 02 15:06:45 2007

Thus spake "Iljitsch van Beijnum" <[email protected]>
So I expect people who are in your position to start requesting blocks larger than /32 or /48 in order to be able to deaggregate, or even request multiple independent PI blocks. It will be interesting to see what this means for the number of PI requests and speed at which the global IPv6 routing table grows.

This is the motivation for the suggestion that folks accept a few extra bits for routes with a short AS_PATH length; that gets you the benefits of TE without cluttering distant ASes with deaggregates. This may also be motivation for RIR policies that explicitly disallow TE as a justification for a larger-than-minimum block.

... so it's not necessary for a router on one side of the globe to
have all the more specifics that are only relevant on the opposite
side of the globe.  ... common sense suggests that there is some
middle ground where it's possible to have address space that's
at least portable within a certain region, but we get to prune the
routing tables elsewhere.

In theory this can be done at the RIR region level; what's to stop RIPE members from blocking all ARIN routes and just having a top-level route for each of ARIN's blocks pointing towards North America, and ARIN members blocking all RIPE routes and having a top-level route for each of RIPE's blocks pointing towards Europe? If we can't get this working at a continental level, considering how good the aggregation is on paper, how do we ever expect to get it working within a region?


Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov