RE: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-24 Thread George Bonser
> -Original Message- > From: Michael Dillon [mailto:wavetos...@googlemail.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2009 4:11 PM > To: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc. > > > I can't in good conscience justify a /32.  That is jus

Re: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-24 Thread Michael Dillon
> I can't in good conscience justify a /32.  That is just too much space. Then you need to go back to IPv6 101. > I believe I can, however, justify a separate /48 in Europe and APAC with > my various offices and data centers in that region coming from the /48 > for that region. A /48 is for a si

RE: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-24 Thread George Bonser
> -Original Message- > From: Scott Leibrand > > It sounds like you're on the right track. You discovered the 2009-5 > Multiple Discrete Networks draft policy, which should allow you a > separate /48 for each discrete network. That is somewhat orthogonal to > the question of whether you s

Re: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-24 Thread Scott Leibrand
e input, Mick. George From: Mick O'Rourke [mailto:mkorou...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 10:43 PM To: Joel Jaeggli Cc: George Bonser; nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc. Is the idea behind the /48 being looked at (keeping in mind a mixed IPv4

RE: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-23 Thread George Bonser
l.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 10:43 PM To: Joel Jaeggli Cc: George Bonser; nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc. Is the idea behind the /48 being looked at (keeping in mind a mixed IPv4/IPv6 environment & http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5375.txt <http://

Re: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-22 Thread Joel Jaeggli
George Bonser wrote: > We have decided to initiate the process of becoming IPv6 capable. We > have requested and received a block of addresses which, after reading > some of the discussion here, I fear may be too small to suit our needs > (a /48). To better understand how to proceed and in an a

RE: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-22 Thread George Bonser
> -Original Message- > From: eric clark > I'm not an expert, but can/should you advertise ARIN IP space on APNIC > or RIPE, etc ? You are talking about having recieved ip space from > ARIN, tied to an ARIN AS I suppose it's probably more a matter of > form than anything else though

Re: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-22 Thread Nathan Ward
On 23/12/2009, at 4:04 PM, Shane Ronan wrote: I'm not an expert, but can/should you advertise ARIN IP space on APNIC or RIPE, etc ? You are talking about having recieved ip space from ARIN, tied to an ARIN AS I suppose it's probably more a matter of form than anything else though. T

Re: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-22 Thread Shane Ronan
> I'm not an expert, but can/should you advertise ARIN IP space on APNIC > or RIPE, etc ? You are talking about having recieved ip space from > ARIN, tied to an ARIN AS I suppose it's probably more a matter of > form than anything else though. This happens all the time with IPv4 space and

Re: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-22 Thread Nathan Ward
On 23/12/2009, at 3:52 PM, George Bonser wrote: If you can justify getting a /32, then I suggest you do so, but if not then don't worry, a /48 will work just fine. The networks that do filter you will pretty soon adapt I expect. I can't in good conscience justify a /32. That is just too muc

Re: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-22 Thread eric clark
I'm not an expert, but can/should you advertise ARIN IP space on APNIC or RIPE, etc ? You are talking about having recieved ip space from ARIN, tied to an ARIN AS I suppose it's probably more a matter of form than anything else though. On Tuesday, December 22, 2009, Nathan Ward wrote: >

RE: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-22 Thread George Bonser
> -Original Message- > From: Nathan Ward [mailto:na...@daork.net] > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 6:34 PM > To: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc. > > The assumption that networks will filter /48s is not the whole story. ...

Re: IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-22 Thread Nathan Ward
The assumption that networks will filter /48s is not the whole story. The RIRs giving out /48s do so from a single pool that only contains / 48 assignments. The RIRs give out /32s from a pool containing /32 or shorter prefixes (ie /31, /30, etc. etc). You will find that most networks filteri

IPv6 allocations, deaggregation, etc.

2009-12-22 Thread George Bonser
We have decided to initiate the process of becoming IPv6 capable. We have requested and received a block of addresses which, after reading some of the discussion here, I fear may be too small to suit our needs (a /48). To better understand how to proceed and in an attempt to get it right (or clos