Regurgitating the original e-mail for context and follow-up. General responses (some that didn't make it to the list): - "There really is that much space, don't worry about it." - /48s for those that ask for it is fine, ARIN won't ask unless it's a bigger assignment - /52 (or /56) on smaller assignments for conservation if it makes you feel better - Open question on whether byte/octet-boundary assignment (/56 vs /52) is better for some reason
I haven't seen anything on the general feel for prefix filtering. I've seen discussions from /48 down to /54. Any feel for what the "standard" (widely deployed) IPv6 prefix filter size will be? Thanks, On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Rick Ernst <na...@shreddedmail.com> wrote: > > A couple of different incantations searching the archive didn't enlighten > me, and I find it hard to believe this hasn't been discussed. Apologies and > a request for pointers if I'm rehashing an old question. > > As a small/regional ISP, we got our /32 assigned and it's time to start > moving forward (customers are asking for it). New hardware, updated IOS, > etc. are in the pipe. Discussions are beginning with our upstream providers > for peering. Now, what do we do? > > A /48 seems to be the standard end-user/multi-homed customer allocation and > is the minimum allocation size from ARIN. A /32 provides 65K /48s so, in > theory, we could give each of our customers a /48 and still have room for > growth. A /48 also appears to be generally accepted as the the longest > prefix allowed through filters (although /49 through /54 are also > discussed). Most customers, however, won't be multi-homed. > > Partly from an IPv4 scarcity perspective, and partly from general > efficiency and thrift, it seems awfully silly to hand out /48s to somebody > that may have a handful of servers or a couple of home machines, especially > with special addressing like link-local if the hosts are not expected to be > internet reachable (back-end servervs, etc). > > Based on the above, I'm looking to establish some initial policies to save > grief in the future: > - /52 allocations to end-users (residential, soho, etc.) > - /48 allocations to those that request it > - If you are going to multi-home, get your own space > > This is obviously a very broad brush and takes an insanely large addressing > model and makes it even larger (assigning /52s instead of /48s) but, to me > at least, it seems reasonable for a first-pass. > > For context/scope, we currently have the equivalent of a bit more than the > equivalent of a /16 (IPv4) in use. > > Thanks, > >
