On 03/16/2010 07:38 AM, Rick Ernst wrote: > 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?
I filter at /48. I would consider filtering on something shorter for assignments of /32 or shorter if there were obvious bad behaver's. We do advertise more specific /36s but we also have the covering /32. > 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, >> >> >
