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
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 00:42:59 -0500 "Christopher Morrow" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jan 1, 2008 8:29 AM, Mark Smith > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 1 Jan 2008 12:57:17 +0100 > > Iljitsch van Beijnum <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 31 dec 2007, at 1:24, Mark Smith wrote: > > > > > > > Another idea would be to give each non-/48 customer the > > > > first /56 out of each /48. > > > > > > Right, so you combine the downsides of both approaches. > > > > > > It doesn't work when ARIN does it: > > > > > > > Well, ARIN aren't running the Internet route tables. If they were, I'd > > assume they'd force AS6453 to do the right thing and aggregate their > > address space. > > > > 11920 - cogeco who I presume (just guessing) is doing this either > because they have not aggregated by mistake or have to shed load and > load-balance). I don't think teleglobe (6453) is at fault here... Yeah, you're right, I missed the line wrapped AS_PATH. > > out of curiousity how is this sort of thing supposed to be done in v6? > (traffic engineering given the '1 prefix per ISP' standard mantra) > > > > > > * 24.122.32.0/20 4.68.1.166 0 0 3356 6453 > > > 11290 i > > > > Static assignments of /56 to customers make sense to me, and that's the > > assumption I've made when suggesting the addressing scheme I proposed. > > Once you go static with /56s, you may as well make it easy for both > > yourself and the customer to move to a /48 that encompasses the > > original /56 (or configure the whole /48 for them from the outset). > > I think the assumption most folks make with DSL/cable is that > end-users get dynamic assignments from a local (to the PE device) > pool, similar to ipv4. I suppose you could do static assignments, but > there's a management payment there that might not fit within the ISP's > cost plan. I presume that something accepting PD would be smart > enough to let the end-hosts/lans know when their top 56 bits > changed... and v6 includes auto-renumbering for 'free' right? So all > solved? > > (yes some of that is joking... or at the very least pointing out a gotcha) > > -Chris -- "Sheep are slow and tasty, and therefore must remain constantly alert." - Bruce Schneier, "Beyond Fear"
|