Yes, Customers should get /56s. The accepted rule was customers should get /48s, but in an ISP environment the “customer” is the POP. Some other things.
-Don’t worry about host count. It’s ipv6. Throw the numbers out the window. Think in terms of subnets and proper boundaries. Count subnets, not addresses -Do not assign customers from POP aggregates -Use iBGP to carry customer ips -Don’t aggregate until you get into ebgp -assign a /64 for point to point links (aka the equivalent of /30s). Again, don’t think in terms of host count. anything smaller than /64’s breaks things. Some providers out there assign smaller blocks, but it breaks things and isn’t RFC. Using a /128 is a hot debate at the moment. Some folks are willing to live with the stuff that is broken. The whole /127 or /128 debate came up due to security concerns mainly. -Just like in IPV4 space. separate blocks for loopbacks and do /128s -Static assignments for customer space is a losing battle. v6 has many mechanisms built in. Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net --- http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman Internet Exchange - Peering - Distributed Fabric > On Jan 15, 2017, at 10:41 AM, Mike Hammett <af...@ics-il.net> wrote: > > Customers should get /56s. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > From: "Lewis Bergman" <lewis.berg...@gmail.com > <mailto:lewis.berg...@gmail.com>> > To: "Animal Farm" <af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>> > Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2017 6:28:09 AM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Best Way to implement dual stack IPv4/6 > > Butch has a practical class on IPV6 which included, years ago, a template > for this. It isn't as challenging as you might think. We did it about 5 > years ago. > > If I remember right, we assigned a /48 to our server network, another /48 > for our backbone, every tower got a /48, and every customer got a /64. All of > that was based on the guidance initially provided by ARIN, or at least I > think that's where it came from. Here is a chart that lists the number of ip > in each that might help. > http://www.potato-people.com/blog/2009/02/ipv6-subnet-size-reference-table/ > <http://www.potato-people.com/blog/2009/02/ipv6-subnet-size-reference-table/> > > Now going 100% v6 is another story. Not trouble free or easy. Never got that > far. > > On Jan 15, 2017 1:09 AM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com > <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote: > I think we all need this. > > -----Original Message----- From: Mitch Koep Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2017 > 9:58 PM To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> Subject: [AFMUG] Best Way to > implement dual stack IPv4/6 > Need some advise on implementing dual stack. > > Best practice or practical. > > Thanks > > Mitch Koep > > 219-851-8689 <tel:219-851-8689> cell
